Given sugarfilled's recent rejections from iStockphoto ("too much post" on a photo straight out of the camera), the fact that someone stole 80% of their iStockphoto portfolio off of someone else's Flickr account--photoshopping the watermark off of a 300kb image already compressed by open source server side scripting code on Flickr's servers--REALLY PISSES ME OFF.

To the point I think I'm going to use up the rest of my iStock credits and find a new stock image supplier.

This is the other far side from this thing and pisses me off far, far more.

It all started a while back when Lane Hartwell got frustrated. Friends spoke up on her behalf.

At some point she called a lawyer and enacted the DMCA on the offending party's asses. See Misunderstanding Copyright Law And Ruining Everyone's Fun and/or My statement regarding the Richter Scales "Here comes another bubble" video dispute.

So there was some mainstream media coverage, and of course the bloggers sang along like a gospel choir. Some offered "easy" solutions.

Finally, she just sent an invoice. And the video was remade without her photograph included.

Early on in all this, I bought thisphotobylanehartwell.com. I've been tracking and writing about the situation in a friends-only post, but in the end, less is more.

So go over to lanehartwell.com, er, I mean thisphotobylanehartwell.com. It is customizable so that whenever you need to provide attribution to someone you can do it in really big text.