Колумбийският вестник El Pais е откраднал тази снимка от flickr потребител (и блогър) и при последвалото дело и медиен шум в колумбийската блогосфера става ясно, че не бива да правят така. Ето и цялата история по темата.

В нея се цитира подобно дело в Холандия – блогър срещу вестник Weekend, където решението на съдията, абсолютно логично, е:

"All four photos that were taken from www.flickr.com were made by [first claimant] and posted by him on that website. In principle, [first claimant] owns the copyright in the tour photos, and the photos, by their posting on that website, are subject to the [Creative Commons] License. Therefore [first defendant] should observe the conditions that control the use by third parties of the photos as stated in the License. The Court understands that [first defendant] was misled by the notice ‘This photo is public’ (and therefore did not take note of the conditions of the License). However, it may be expected from a professional party like [first defendant] that it conducts a thorough and precise examination before publishing in Weekend photos originating from the internet. Had it conducted such an investigation, [first defendant] would have clicked on the symbol accompanying the notice ‘some rights reserved’ and encountered the (short version of) the License. In case of doubt as to the applicability and the contents of the License, it should have requested authorization for publication from the copyright holder of the photos ([first claimant]). [First defendant] has failed to perform such a detailed investigation, and has assumed too easily that publication of the photos was allowed.[first defendant] has not observed the conditions stated in the License […]. The claim […] will therefore be allowed; defendants will be enjoined from publishing all photos that [first claimant] has published on www.flickr.com, unless this occurs in accordance with the conditions of the License."

Демек, вестника бърка.

Да видим в моя случай кой греши. (Все още нямам дата за делото)