<html> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> With my customer's permission, I sent to this list two photograps he took of his piano, to facilitate technical discussion about it and the room it was in. A member of the PTG, an RPT, has saved a copy of one of those images and used it on his home page without reference to me.  I would have been pleased to check beforehand with my customer about use of the photo, and perhaps to put the RPT in touch with my customer. As it is, I cannot get the RPT to acknowledge the law on intellectual property theft, despite having emailed him a link to <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://webnet77.com/webstuff/copyright.html">http://webnet77.com/webstuff/copyright.html</a>  which explains the law. Instead, the RPT calls me an ass and tells me to buzz off, tells me that the law does not apply to him in this case, accuses me of refusing to put him in touch with my client the owner of the image (I have not refused), and says he took the image and used it because he liked it. He says now that I am becoming an insufferable ass. I like my neighbour's car much better than mine so..... I feel as if my client entrusted me with appropriate use of the two images of his piano. He gave me permission to use it in connection with this list, but nothing else. I feel that there is potential to make me look bad with my client, who did not, surely, reckon on part of his holiday home living room being shown on the home page of a technician in the USA. Can anyone clarify the stance of the PTG's code of ethics on this matter? I have to say that I am really puzzled by this event. This is the first time I have come across such a thing on this list.  I have two photos on my own website which were posted to this list, but I gobtained permission before using them.  Until now there has always been appropriate respect here for other people's intellectual property. David Boyce. </body> </html>