Why do you people continue to pretend like you know the answer when you obviously have NO knowledge of copyright law or what goes on in the real world? You want Canadian law? Do a search on "masterfile corporation" (a Canadian corporation) and "damages." Then come back and answer the question correctly.
So according to this http://www.masterfile.com/info/corporate/press/release_20071002.html In 'the real world' they sued someone for $46,000 but they don't expect to get the damages. It says for 1 image it probably isn't worth pursuing. Who would sue someone if they're not gonna get their money. That's just throwing money away, unless you're the lawyer eh.
Making heads roll.. Shock factor, reputation, fear, track record ? --------------- Does anyone know who they are tracking these images ? do they imbed a code in the image and do searches on them ?
So much bad information in this thread. It's real simple, if it's not your image then you have no right to use it. Don't try and use Google as a justification because you are not Google, nor do you have the building full of lawyers that Google has. Google is a search engine, not a free photo house. Stop trying to look for ways to justify using something that is not yours and act like a real business person and get your own images. What's so hard about that? And if you don't have the money or resources to get your own images, then you aren't ready to be a web publisher. It's really simple. Images are cheap. Press images are easy to get, and there are plenty of CC images out there as well....if none of that is possible or you can't afford, then you are in the wrong business. You don't just take stuff from people because you don't have any money.
That is a good idea, you should surely try doing it. It is quite innovative and moreover they can provide you some real good pictures.
Already said by previous posters but, never use photos (or anything else that is copyrighted) without a written consent from the true copyright owner. A civil lawsuit ain't no joke. I don't believe that any judge anywhere throws anyone out when it's a civil lawsuit for an obvious copyright infringement.