Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TedG954" data-source="post: 410141" data-attributes="member: 9701">I don't believe that the Park or the government is in any way unfair in this situation. As a matter of fact, it appears that they are being very forgiving.If someone is going to open a business, it is that person's responsibility to investigate all the avenues of that business, including rules, regulations, and required permits for conducting that business. Being &quot;unaware&quot; is not a defense. If someone is going to profit from something I pay to maintain (taxes &amp; fees), then I expect that profiteer to pay more than I do. That's what permits are for.I see people on various photography sites rant about someone using their photograph without &quot;permission&quot; when taken off the internet. That's not much different than this situation. If someone wants to use your house or your car in a movie, would you expect to be compensated?&nbsp; A Park belongs to all of the citizens that pay for the upkeep and maintenance of that Park. If someone goes beyond the normal uses of the park, and they profit from that use, why shouldn't the citizens be compensated?&nbsp; (Or, why not donate the profits to the Park as a gesture of appreciation?&nbsp; I doubt that whatever the &quot;profits&quot; are, they are life-changing.)I'm amazed that the authorities aren't issuing a fine or calculating charges for other photos of the Park being sold.If you want to play....... you have to pay.&nbsp; That's certainly not a new concept.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TedG954, post: 410141, member: 9701"] I don't believe that the Park or the government is in any way unfair in this situation. As a matter of fact, it appears that they are being very forgiving. If someone is going to open a business, it is [I]that [/I]person's responsibility to investigate all the avenues of that business, including rules, regulations, and required permits for conducting that business. Being "unaware" is not a defense. If someone is going to profit from something I pay to maintain (taxes & fees), then I expect that profiteer to pay [I]more [/I]than I do. That's what permits are for. I see people on various photography sites rant about someone using their photograph without "permission" when taken off the internet. That's not much different than this situation. If someone wants to use your house or your car in a movie, would you expect to be compensated? A Park belongs to [U]all[/U] of the citizens that pay for the upkeep and maintenance of that Park. If someone goes beyond the normal uses of the park, and they profit from that use, why shouldn't the citizens be compensated? (Or, why not donate the profits to the Park as a gesture of appreciation? I doubt that whatever the "profits" are, they are life-changing.) I'm amazed that the authorities aren't issuing a fine or calculating charges for other photos of the Park being sold. If you want to play....... you have to pay. That's certainly not a new concept. [/QUOTE]

Verification