Hi Ed
This message confused me as you responded to statements from two different
people.

-> -> If someone uses an image of mine on a poster advertising a Church
-> -> supper - I cold care less.  Someone uses my image in a National
-> -> Advertising campaine for Revlon cosmetics -- I WOULD care - big time! 
-> 
-> Well - really an oversimplification.  One should pay attention to the overall
-> situaton.

That wasn't from me....

  If a photograph of mine was used to advertise a church supper, I
-> probably would not pass up a chance to "milk" the use a
little bit.  I'd write
-> a letter congratulating the copyright usurper on their extrodinarily good taste
-> (ahem!!), and making a PR "play" of granting them a
"One Time North American
-> Advertising Use" by sending them a completed "Copyright
Transfer" form - "Just
-> in case anyone should ask" (again ahem!!).

Well, you know quite well that I'd send out a bill in most cases, but if
it's a church thing, I might reconsider.  I'd likely send a letter
explaining the laws though.   I do like that line about their good taste. 
Remind me to use that next time  :)
->  
-> she said, she could get $6,000 for what she called "theft of
-> intellectual property." 
-> 
-> Now *there* is a stretch - She would have to prove some unique *Intellectual*
-> value,

She says it's the standard fee for unauthorized use of artistic works.

 -> There is always Small Claims Court -

Ya, that's likely where she'd have gone with it.  That used to be more than
small claims dealt with, last time I looked into it, but everything has
gone up now so maybe they handle that sort of amount now.  No matter.  It
wasn't the same picture after all.

 Karen
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5