Frannkly I am exhausted with the subject and have already made my points known. Can those involved with Chipguide PLEASE stop making declarations of their understanding of copyright, just to defer to "well that it was I was told by so and so" I have only given my opinion and am not the caretaker of thousands of images like those who speak on behalf of Chipguide.

Not sure why professional advice was not retained before stances were made but regardless some talking points-

1.) The notion that a new and original image has been created by CG.

2.) The aversion to stating " Photo Courtesy Of" as stated by every other know publication on photos that are not their own. The vague verbiage of "submitted" coupled with the stance that any permission is irrevocable lends credence to the notion of giving something away.

3) The inclusion of the slightest watermark to protect Chipguide from use of the photo as it is seen on their website

4.) The need for a checks and balance as far as the validity of submissions. This not only protects the submitter but also Chipguide.

I only want Chipguide to succeed because it is a phenomenal tool for the hobby. But it is in desperate need of an overhaul and updated guidelines.

E
R-8784