HMMMM Suspicious?!?!

[tgraszat14]

well SKY, like the honorable Ron Burgandy once said:

" I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal. People know me."

Your reviews are yours. Mainly the reason we are quoted, linked and shown on so many sites is because of you. I see links to your stuff, (which is mentioned is yours, by you) on all different sites. People know your stuff and with my grade 12 law class I believe that what is yours is yours by right and no one else has the authority to use your reviews without your say. It's not like, as I quoted above, your not a big deal. In fact you are, people will not let this stand because of how you stand in the community.
You SKY are my Ron Burgandy, and I would follow you to any news team (or HWC team) rumble you would be in.

(btw, I hope you guys have seen Anchorman or I feel pretty awkward right now...)

You stay classy HWC

[SKYMTL]

hes right

I know he is.

[1Tanker]

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

I know he is.

I think you've handled it in an honorable and professional manner... no sense sinking to others' levels. If the site continues to deny, then do what you must. I commend you on giving them a chance to come clean.

[DK2]

ya, looks like a piciture of a picture to me, the lower part crop'd out to get rid of the HWC logo.

[sswilson]

I would have expected something like this from a noob reviewer, not from someone who's been around quite a few years.

On the topic of "better" (read more intrusive) watermarks..... It was discussed last year and the consensus was that we didn't want to go out of our way to mar the image with a watermark. That's why all of our watermarks are generally in the lower R/H corner. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that this episode doesn't change that decision.

[SKYMTL]

I don't think it will change the decision at all regarding the watermark. A watermark is a watermark no matter where it is placed and as such should be respected by EVERY site out there. It doesn't matter if the WM is big, small or even nonexistant; any image we take and is posted in the reviews is our property. We have no issues with individuals using the images to post on forums or anywhere else for that matter since it is not for their own financial gain as was this.

We even offered t olet the matter slide as long as they either reinserted the image with the WM or removed the image altogether but no dice.

[Spawne32]

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

I don't think it will change the decision at all regarding the watermark. A watermark is a watermark no matter where it is placed and as such should be respected by EVERY site out there. It doesn't matter if the WM is big, small or even nonexistant; any image we take and is posted in the reviews is our property. We have no issues with individuals using the images to post on forums or anywhere else for that matter since it is not for their own financial gain as was this.

We even offered t olet the matter slide as long as they either reinserted the image with the WM or removed the image altogether but no dice.

If hes making money of your work, its time to get the lawyer ;)

[bojangles]

Just keep on keepin' on SKYMTL. Legal stuff sucks, but there's always someone to cause trouble *cough*Rodney Reynolds*cough*.

[jonnyGURU]

Wow... Trying to give Rodney the benefit of the doubt here.... the angle's different.... umm... nope. Same picture. If you turn his pic a little and resize, EVERYTHING lines up perfectly. :(

[SKYMTL]

It does. Which is why I emailed him only to have him deny it. I am pretty good in Photoshop so lining up the pics is no problem at all...and they line up PERFECTLY.