But as I said, I could not care less what your assumption should be. Still, it cannot be helped that I am directly responding to your message, so quote it I have to. I am more then open to admit that my interpretation might be not what the speaker intended it to be, and which I have already done so, quite unlike others who remain utterly stubborn and myopic (and apparantly considers that a virtue).
Anyhow, this is just a sidedish. I am much more concerned over that interpretation of the law concerning photography of buildings and models.