Quote:
Originally posted by WebLegal
Why did I post that up there? Simply because I was getting tired of all of the BS about the whole matter. I was tired of being lied about (which is what happened here), and I was getting tired of having words put in my mouth.
Since the original customer and complaintant has now withdrawn his issue, I have removed those images from my webserver at this time.
Also for your consideration: If Mr. Van Varik had simply asked for his refund in the first place, none of this would have happened, period. I do take care of my customers.
|
The point has been missed here. I don't have problem with you posting ID's as long as the personal info. has been blacked out.
All I was saying is that you completely undermined your "potential stalker argument" by doing it.
Questions:
Do you think an ID with the personal details blacked out is an invasion of the models privacy?
Would you be prepared to send me, the webmaster - your customer, an ID with the personal details blacked out for content set I had bought from you?
Don't you think it would be wise to fall into line with the majority of other major content brokers/producers out there and provide an ID with the personal details blacked out to all webmasters who buy your content either during purchase or at the very least on request?
Don't you think if this had been WebLegal's policy in the first place, this entire issue would have been avoided?
And hence don't you think you should change your policy, and announce it here, in doing so avoiding this situation arising again in the future?
I have no doubt that you are entirely justified in questioning some of Newgrade's emails and actions.
I'm just saying changing your policy to providing ID's with personal details blacked out would keep everyone happy, you (anti-stalker argument) and your customer (satisfactory proof of ID).
