All Rights Reserved

Hmmm. Already a second photo credit. Except this one didn't come with a request form for permission.

At least there's attribution. Not that I would be looking for compensation or anything. I wouldn't even have noticed if not for Technorati.

It's also not like I booked a studio, expensive models, or rented equipment. Anyone with a camera walking by the same area (or one of the other 400 across the country) could easily have taken the same photo.

Still, this feels wrong to me. IANAL (or a professional photographer either), but I assumed that I retain all rights to my photos by default. I did consciously set my Flickr licensing to "None (All rights reserved)" after all. Had I been asked, I would gladly, and freely, have allowed this photo to be used with attribution, like the other one.

I'd just like to know about it. The Web makes it too easy to "re-use" someone else's "work" and people seem to have assumed that if it's out there in the wild for all to see, it's public domain.

That brings up the issue of taking photos of someone else's artwork. Do they not also retain the original copyright? Even if the piece is in a very public place?

Earthbound... Unbound by Ingo Maurer