Everybody but the bigots win.

Stock photo company gets money, the gays won't lose their right to marry, and the "traditional marriage" folks will get laughed out of the state.

We're going to need new stock photos of gay couples to fill the picture frames at Pier One.

So lets sideline issues with the group that they are massive bigots trying to impose their own morality on other people and thus are enemies of freedom and human rights, and lets concentrate on whether they use stock photos or real ones because that is really the core of their failings. Next up go after the BBC news website which uses stock photos for half its articles, which obvious marks it out as a failure for the same reason, who cares whether their news stories are any good or not.

I really don't understand Ameridesign's position here. They willingly put their photos up for anyone to use, as long as they pay, and now they're complaining about a company paying to use their photos.

Tough shiat.

midigod: I really don't understand Ameridesign's position here. They willingly put their photos up for anyone to use, as long as they pay, and now they're complaining about a company paying to use their photos.

Tough shiat.

QFT

If they had used the photos without paying for them, or getting an agreement, then that'd be a story. If one of the models in the ad was gay, then that'd be hilarity. As it is Ameridesign entered into business agreements and can't get too bent out of shape. Use a better screening process from here on out if your integrity has become an issue over this.

NOM is retarded in plenty of other ways; their web design is pretty far down on the list.

Just re-read that -- OK, so it's not NOM this time, but they're still advocating for a retarded cause.

rudemix: If one of the models in the ad was gay, then that'd be hilarity.

Already has happened. Last year - NOM used a picture (can't locate it now) and one of the models came forward and complained. The picture disappeared off the NOM website in 2 seconds.

/the people behind (anti) family groups really quite bad at using technology

The interesting thing wasn't actually that a bunch of bigots use stock photos on their website...the interesting thing was the linked article that shows New Hampshire for Marriage (NOM-supported state group) using Obama campaign rally photos in their photo collages of their events.

I mean, seriously, what the hell?

bravian: rudemix: If one of the models in the ad was gay, then that'd be hilarity.

Already has happened. Last year - NOM used a picture (can't locate it now) and one of the models came forward and complained. The picture disappeared off the NOM website in 2 seconds.

/the people behind (anti) family groups really quite bad at using technology

Awesome!

midigod: I really don't understand Ameridesign's position here. They willingly put their photos up for anyone to use, as long as they pay, and now they're complaining about a company paying to use their photos.

Tough shiat.

I don't think that's quite what's going on. My interpretation was that Ameridesign was contacted by Seattle PI and gave a slightly expressive version of the "the views of our customers are not shared by us" line.

Basically, "Hey, look, anyone can buy our photos; we're not involved in the process. We don't agree with these guys just because our photo is on their website."

phyrkrakr: The interesting thing wasn't actually that a bunch of bigots use stock photos on their website...the interesting thing was the linked article that shows New Hampshire for Marriage (NOM-supported state group) using Obama campaign rally photos in their photo collages of their events.

I mean, seriously, what the hell?

They're a group of bigots. They can't let little things like facts get in the way of their agenda.

AND the group running the webpage is not even from Washington State. The page is registered by a group in New Jersey.
Do a WHOIS lookup....

People in another far away State have no business trying to run a petition in another State. It is just like another country comming in and trying to influence an election in this country, just on a different scale.

Furthermore - I have been searching the database for registered entities in Washington State and can't find this group registered. Then again I've only been searching for about 30 minutes.

Should Washingotn residents and citizens consider this a hostile foreign (to Washington) group trying to influence Washingon State law and politics?

If they were honest about protecting Washington Familes, then they would be registered in Washington and use Washington hosting services and state clearly who is backing them.