especially anyone who's login begins with a Q... It's a bit reckless to assume that no one else knows anything about a given subject just because you don't Not at all. In the larger majority of cases I was quite correct. I am not a lawyer and neither were any of those posting up until that point. And as you (HonorMac) imply, you're not either. So no, I wasn't being reckless but simply stating a point that was apparently clear at that time. If you wish to take issue with my claiming that nobody was a lawyer when in fact they were feel free to post or mail me details of your or others qualifications and which bar you're or they are registered with and I'll be happy to post a public apology. That applies to anyone supplying information in this thread who actually IS a lawyer. Until then anything posted IS pure speculation and without coherent and determined research remains speculation and conjecture based upon interpretation. Also, the links I provided were examples and as a base for further research, as I suggested in my post, NOT as firm and hard proof of anything. The simple thing that is overlooked by the larger majority of people when suffering the "wow cool" factor is whether or not there are any legal precedents, or information pertaining to the subject at hand, and the surprising retisence of people to research or understand a point. That you (HonorMac) appear to show some understanding of the subject is neither here nor there. Without proof of qualification I, and others can only take your posting as conjecture based upon your interpretation and beliefs. Much as mine was. Further research and solid legal advice is still needed by those who would profit from and advertise by using, celebrities. Need a nap? Hardly, but thanks for the concern though. :)