Ad exec: Screwing other people while getting all the buzz!! Why the hell not???
One of the worst of such case is the Chingay ripoff, can be voted joke of 2010.
even if you have, can you show that you have added significant value to your company to make that statement out there? how? even if you have, so what????
are you saying, i have to be a chef's front desk manager to how restaurants operate? tsk.
talk is cheap.
some nice fellow cser already pointed out that t and c is more advantageous for organizer rather than participant.
we can only guess whether organizer intended or will use it or not.
but if you don't mind to bend over in future then go ahead, just don't complain how sore your backside. of course it also depend whether you are 'lucky' or up to organizer's taste..i mean preference XD
Perhaps you don't realise the t's and c's haven't changed from the film days, when people sent in 8x10's by post to take part in photo competitions. You must be thinking they were also desperate to hoard 8x10's back then for their corporate image bank too.
was he directing it at kit/naimeh?amateur images
cause i am laughing and i still am.
you obviously have no idea how corporations work.
do newspapers need reputation? do they have money to pay photographers for use of image? yes???
btw, if your only point is that the corporations have no need to use your images.... and it's some silly catch-all phrase, then let me point out to you, if that is the case, then your point of it being a catch-all phrase that some deputy director (or god knows what) can potentially exercise to reproduce entries according to his mood and whims, this is precisely what we're talking about, potential use of images without compensation.
talk about slapping yourself in the face. think it's better to come up with something more reasonable and stop using silly things like "you don't know corporations", "you don't know marketing". that serves no positive purpose. this is what's called an EMOTIVE argument. usually when people have run out of things to say that seem logical, they will resort to this.
imagine if debates were done the way you're arguing here. say, the topic of "should cows wear bra?"
then you argue "you don't know cows! you don't know bras!". suffice to say, i doubt you'd get much sympathy from the audience before they start laughing you out. this is essentially a logical fallacy, i.e. that of appealing to authority. A makes a claim of being authority on subject S. A claims X about subject S. therefore X is true. suffice to say, i doubt you are an expert in marketing, so much for all that "you don't know marketing". to put it bluntly - you know meh? how much you know? got proof or not. if not, then your argument literally holds no water, you're just claiming that you know a lot about the subject so what you say is correct. i can simply dispute that.
Last edited by night86mare; 24th December 2010 at 09:06 AM.
I think this thread is very OT liao. My shifu recommends us to link more liang teh.
anyways, thanks for posting up the link. was merely trying to highlight what a lot of people view as a T&C that they disagree with. guess i'll stop here, since there seems no point in talking sense, now that Xtol19 is claiming to be an authority on marketing, corporations and probably the Master of the Universe as well. when it reaches that point, i really cannot argue against a self-proclaimed Master of the Universe, so better pull out before it reaches that stage and he tells me about my life and the secrets behind it and dazzles me with his brilliance and knowledge. cheers!