TZUTC: -0500   
   MSGID: 1472.consprcy@1:2320/105 2d1d8c50   
   REPLY: 1470.consprcy@1:2320/105 2d1d7b66   
   PID: Synchronet 3.21a-Linux master/123f2d28a Jul 12 2025 GCC 12.2.0   
   TID: SBBSecho 3.28-Linux master/123f2d28a Jul 12 2025 GCC 12.2.0   
   BBSID: CAPCITY2   
   CHRS: ASCII 1   
   FORMAT: flowed   
   > MP>That said, several years ago I too several photos and a couple of the   
   >   >locations (one a lighthouse and another a lake cruise) reached out and   
   >   >asked if they could use them to promote their locations.  I said yes even   
   >   >though I am not getting paid.   
      
   > Did they see the photos at the time or had you posetd them somewhere later?   
   > Probably as you thought, there'd be very little monney to be made there   
   > and you might just feel good that your photos were considered that good.   
      
   I had posted them to FB.  It was somewhat flattering as I never really   
   considered myself to be that much of a photographer.  In the case of the   
   lighthouse, that is mostly/completely a volunteer group that runs that   
   organization.  I figured if it helped them get folks interested in a visit,   
   it was a good thing.  When I visited, they were not yet to the point of   
   opening for tours (it wasn't even staffed... I just walked up, took a few   
   photos, and enjoyed the view).  They were gearing up for future tours when   
   they asked.   
      
   In the case of the lake cruise, the photos were of things you probably   
   wouldn't see unless you were on the cruise or owned/hired your own boat.   
   They might make a little money off using them.   
      
   > MP>> If you say it to them and only them, you are in the clear (Though being   
   > Kor   
   >   >> I am sure there are other laws they can get you on.).  Though with or   
   > witho   
   >   >> oppinion if you saw something to a third party that "defames" them, you   
   > mig   
   >   >> want a lawyer on retainer.   
      
   > I'm not sure if telling the truth about someone, and there's no question   
   > it is true, would be 'defamation'..  Or at least shouldn't be IMHO..  B)   
      
   It should not be, but it sounds like it must run afoul of some law in South   
   Korea.  I know some of the eastern Asian cultures have a thing about   
   "saving face" but that really goes too far.   
      
   > The definition online says defamation falls under two catagories, slander   
   > and libel depending on if it is spoken or written, but they point out   
   > that that refers to making FALSE statements..   
      
   That is how I think it should be applied.   
      
   Mike   
      
    * SLMR 2.1a * WORK HARDER!... Millions on Welfare depend on YOU!   
   --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux   
    * Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)   
   SEEN-BY: 105/81 106/201 128/187 129/14 305 153/7715 154/110 218/700   
   SEEN-BY: 226/30 227/114 229/110 111 206 300 307 317 400 426 428 470   
   SEEN-BY: 229/664 700 705 266/512 291/111 320/219 322/757 342/200 396/45   
   SEEN-BY: 460/58 712/848 902/26 2320/0 105 304 3634/12 5075/35   
   PATH: 2320/105 229/426