If they sue for defamation, they'd have to prove you are defaming them (ie you are wrong) and they'd have to prove that your defamation had caused them damage which might be difficult to do.
I don't think the pictures are clearly in the public domain at all. Just because they are posted online, does not make them public domain.
... decided to throw their toys out of the pram.
I'll wear a nice smart suit and my Dad's lovely old 1965 Speedmaster. Would they let me in?😟
You could wear a tutu and flippers... as long as you have ID and follow their rules they'll let you in chap. 👍
From Wikipedia
"The term public domain has two senses of meaning. Anything published is out in the public domain in the sense that it is available to the public. Once published, news and information in books are in the public domain, although they may also be copyrighted. In the sense of intellectual property, works in the public domain are those whose exclusive intellectual property rights have expired, have been forfeited, have been expressly waived, or are inapplicable."
I meant the first sense, and if you link to the photo on their site you aren't copying it so I don't see that you could be infringing copyright.
I doubt they would be so stupid as to take the matter to court, the usual tactic is just to bully people into erring on the side of caution which is what they are trying here.
You could wear a tutu and flippers... as long as you have ID and follow their rules they'll let you in chap. 👍
The pictures are clearly in the public domain and you are allowed fair comment on them
Jolly good Chris. I'll give it a go.👍
In which case we'll need pictures of more than just the watch.
Besides any legal considerations, what annoyed me the most was the lack of any kind words, friendliness or appreciation. You may have different opinions on a watch, you may value it different ( profit driven vs. rational approach, easy to tell what belongs to which party in this case.) but WoK obviously using 101 as a resource for whatever should have a different attitude.
They get exposure and publicity among people who are willing to spend fortunes, which is great for their business, hence they should cope with their own shortcomings in curating first...before they threaten to sue someone because they fail to do their due dilligence ( a romantic word for that would be "honesty" ).
I will rather continue to overpay for something I want and that's worth it, to private collectors, no bad taste in my mouth, no feeling of "well, almost what they promised me..".
The pictures are absolutely not in the public domain. They are publicly available and you may be allowed to republish them under fair use (I don’t know), but they are under copyright.
Just to be clear I am not defending wok at all. All I was really saying is it is often best to just get bullied into compliance with their requests. It sucks but I have seen lots of people spend lots of money on "pride/principle" issues. Good lawyers in this field can be $550 an hour or more.
IMO spacefruit has the right idea. Let someone else take pictures and grant spacefruit fair use of them. Problem solved. 😀
They also 'kindly' asked him to refrain from commenting on their future auctions, and I would definitely tell them to go forth and multiply on that one!
Yes I understand your point and different people have different tolerances for risk. From my own point of view, I hate to see bullying, and I think the risk of them taking action beyond getting their lawyer to write a formal letter is pretty slim, so I'd tell them where to go. But I can completely understand if someone else takes a different approach.
They also 'kindly' asked him to refrain from commenting on their future auctions, and I would definitely tell them to go forth and multiply on that one!
