Sorry, I still don't get it. I mean if I want people to see it (advertising), but then write I already have exposure then I'd feel really weird.
Showing (be it advertisement or whatever), but not allowing it to be seen by others is (for the lack of another word) strange. At least it sounds pretty weird to me. I don't get what's wrong by getting this version he published and for example put it on a blog saying. Hey look, what I found on the bog/website of this guy. Isn't it awesome?
I mean in a way it is like taking a photo of his work and show it to others. It's not like I'd be taking it away from him.
I'd respect it, if the author doesn't want more exposure. It's his choice, but then I'd even feel bad to link his blog posts, website or even mention his name.
Maybe I miss something, but I don't understand why a photo of nature, published freely on the internet has to be kept like a secret.
I mean what if we put this to other stuff, like when I make my money selling text, knowledge or thoughts in general. Does this mean everyone is supposed to not share the thought, quote or recite it. It also costs me time and sometimes money (education).
Again, I am not taking anything away. After all it's just data. Should I ever draw a painting or describe a scene in a book. I may even base my work on his, without noticing. Still some people don't want anything based on their work.
If I'd have to ask about everything I copy and share with others I wouldn't dare to do anything.
What I also don't get is the asking thing. What's so bad about people asking whether they are allowed to use the photo?
The argument about the dinner is also flawed. In fact there are lots of businesses giving stuff away for free, to get more exposure. Also the dinner means that the restaurant will actually loose something.
And then there are these companies that even give you a free dinner in order to show you something/get exposure. Advertising also isn't free.
That's an amazing photo and I appreciate what it took to get that captured. But, here's the problem: Everyone who read this article now has a copy of that photograph in their possession, simply because of the way computers work. Does he expect every person with that photo in their browser cache to pay him for it? Of course not. But even if he wanted to - he wouldn't be able to.
And that's the issue. Many of us want the benefits of the Internet without the drawbacks, and that is literally not possible. We want the ease of communication, the low cost, and the instant delivery. But, we don't want everyone to have a copy. And we can't have one without the other.
