I'm not sure what the legal differences are, but in my opinion it might have a lot to do with the practicalities of advertising (and that car thing I mentioned; how can you legally stop people from taking photos of objects in their possession, even if it is a copyrighted design?) and sales.

I guess it's kind of like this: so long as the photo isn't used in conjunction with an advertisement or endorsement of a product of some sort, it would be ok to use.... In theory, I'm just guessing here.

I saw the brouhaha with Toyota and the people who own and promote their cars on another site awhile back. That was just weird. (For a follow-up on this, see the statement at the bottom of this page.) I think that with ongoing changes in IP laws around the world, and things like the DMCA which specifically relate to content on the Internet, that it is a cloudy issue. I know that here in the US it has been reported that the profit-motive doesn't have any bearing on the right to use other people's intellectual property without permission. Also supposedly in the case of trademark, the holders MUST protect it and not let any infraction go unprosecuted, or they would be at risk of losing their trademark. Of course any IP owner has the ability to grant a license to anyone they see fit. It's also true that IP experts don't always agree on the law and the rights it confers.

In the meantime it seems like we would be less likely to face prosecution for posting someone else's photos here than creating replica puppets without authorization and selling them.

My 2¢

Ron G.