[tirod]

Yes, the consensus - right or wrong - is that a picture on the internet can be freely cross posted. The issue butts up with legal purview if someone is making money with it, and lawyers aren't prone to accept cases unless it meets their minimum financial attention.

You can't see a picture on the web unless a copy is given to the viewer, same as a magazine. Is it illegal to cut a page out the magazine and frame it for display, then sell it at the flea market?

Like musicians copying riffs, commercial industry will copy an idea and market it. It comes to mind Carroll Shelby attempted to retain rights over some of that, and lost. Ford owns the word "Cobra," and we still use it freely.

Tony Hogg used it in that article, which I read back then, too. He was describing the "value" of dropping it into a conversation. As if nobody at a party could hear the car pulling into the driveway. Must have been a really big house, I guess.

Time passes, builders are now using 427 Windsors that make even more hp, in kits that cost less and have better performance. Frankly, Shelby is being outdone by the same philosophy that he used to beat Ferrari.

"Is it a real one?" These days, thankfully, we don't need to be limited to that. Glad to see his parked in a museum. Older athletes are best presented in suits at dinners, not on the track. The smart ones go out at the top of their game.

It's much sadder to see them lose past their prime.