This is my first reply to a post in eons. Stuff given away free should have any damn restrictions the artist sees fit to apply. It's free for cripesakes. The artist should still specify whether the the item is for personal use only, if royalties apply, royalty-free, or if redistibution is ok. However, restrictions on stuff you pay for should be published at the point-of-sale. If I pay for an item, it's probably because I need it for a specific work that I am selling to someone else. I expect some restrictions, but NOT that I cannot use the item in a commercial work. That's ridiculuous. Are you asking me to pay for it so I look at it? I don't care if it costs 50$ or 100$. If I need it for a work, I'll pay, as long as my client can afford it. But I need to know this BEFORE I buy it. Naturally, if the the item is only for my personal amusement, then price matters a little more :) Whether I can only use a payed-for item for in one commericial work, and must pay for additional uses (royalties), or if I can use it in multiple commercial works (royalaty-free) should be specified. These restrictions seem fair, no matter what the original price. Redistribution of the original item, altered or unaltered should not happen, unless the artist who created it specifically gives permission to do so. The American Society of Magazine Photographers (ASMP) worked all this out years ago, and is pretty much standard stuff. I agree with Bushi. Never give up; never surrender. --ratta