Small Business uses photo and mocks the photographer's copyright

So, I follow the White Moose Cafe on facebook. They are pretty controversial but mostly funny.
Then this just came up today. A while back, the small business used a photo they found on google without checking with the photographer. This could have been handled a different way. The photographer contacted them nicely and, instead of working it out with her, they decided to post her message on facebook and publicly mock her copyright claim and profession.

What do you guys think about this post?
Opinions/facts about copyrights?
This is in Dublin so I am not sure about their copyright laws, but I think he might be in trouble here.
Here is the link to the post. White Moose Cafe

Here is a screen shot of some of the post. There is much more in the actual post.

So they removed a watermark in addition to violating copyright? Interesting. What does the law have to say about that over there?

For their comments they've posted, I honestly kind of hope the legal fallout is enough to tank their business. Hopefully in a rather public fashion, and hopefully serve as a reminder to others to play by the rules.

Luckless wrote in post #18120902
So they removed a watermark in addition to violating copyright? Interesting. What does the law have to say about that over there?

For their comments they've posted, I honestly kind of hope the legal fallout is enough to tank their business. Hopefully in a rather public fashion, and hopefully serve as a reminder to others to play by the rules.

What alarms me more is the amount of people agreeing with him. So many people that do not respect photographers' copyrights at all. People saying the photo isn't worth anything anyway, etc.

If it wasn't worth anything, then why did they choose to use it to promote their business?

Luckless wrote in post #18120911
If it wasn't worth anything, then why did they choose to use it to promote their business?

EXACTLY!
Now the main argument is "It comes up in the 'free to reuse' google search so it is fine"
well this is straight from google "...Google can't tell if the license label is legitimate, so we don't know if the content is lawfully licensed." https://support.google​.com/websearch/answer/​29508?hl=en

Rule #1 for any business using images: CHECK WITH THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER FOR THE LICENSING TERMS FIRST

If "It was on the internet as free for re-use" was a completely valid and foolproof defence, then the most obvious thing to do would be to set up a throw away account from a local library computer, and rehost the image you're looking to use with fake meta-data on it.

The 80's was all about money laundering, today? Copyright laundering apparently.

Luckless wrote in post #18120936
If "It was on the internet as free for re-use" was a completely valid and foolproof defence, then the most obvious thing to do would be to set up a throw away account from a local library computer, and rehost the image you're looking to use with fake meta-data on it.

The 80's was all about money laundering, today? Copyright laundering apparently.

o wait, he fixed it. apparently you can steal any image, remove the watermark, give the photographer credit (while mocking them), and get out of paying to use it for commercial use.
Also, too many people think that paying with publicity is an acceptable form of payment.

Luckless wrote in post #18120936
If "It was on the internet as free for re-use" was a completely valid and foolproof defence, then the most obvious thing to do would be to set up a throw away account from a local library computer, and rehost the image you're looking to use with fake meta-data on it.

The 80's was all about money laundering, today? Copyright laundering apparently.

This is a valid business model nowadays - e.g. done by Getty: Getty being sued for $1Billion

drmaxx wrote in post #18120948
This is a valid business model nowadays - e.g. done by Getty: Getty being sued for $1Billion

I wouldn't mind getting paid via a lawsuit! lol

by their same logic, we can just go in the restaurant and eat their food for free as long as we tell everyone they made it

BlakeC wrote in post #18120954
by their same logic, we can just go in the restaurant and eat their food for free as long as we tell everyone they made it

Fun protest plan would be to get a large group of people there to all go eat around the same time, then do a big social media campaign about how 'good' their meal was, including some well phrased insults, and then all leave while claiming that they paid-in-trade with their promotional efforts.

Luckless wrote in post #18120960
Fun protest plan would be to get a large group of people there to all go eat around the same time, then do a big social media campaign about how 'good' their meal was, including some well phrased insults, and then all leave while claiming that they paid-in-trade with their promotional efforts.

yes! i should use that comparison when small businesses contact me and try to get me to do work for them for "mentions on social media"

Funny thing is all of this crap could be avoided by just admitting to their mistake. Here's to hoping that this blows up in their face, acting like an ass is pretty much never a good idea when promoting your business.

solepatch wrote in post #18120986
Funny thing is all of this crap could be avoided by just admitting to their mistake. Here's to hoping that this blows up in their face, acting like an ass is pretty much never a good idea when promoting your business.

Indeed, but that is precisely what so many people no longer are capable of doing –their humility system was stunted right after birth.

BlakeC wrote in post #18120906
What alarms me more is the amount of people agreeing with him. So many people that do not respect photographers' copyrights at all. People saying the photo isn't worth anything anyway, etc.

Guess we're now the new bourgeoisie the masses need to be liberated from. A 'pictures rights' movement might be forthcoming, because 'the pictures want to be free'.

There is already a strong movement online that is sometimes lumped in with "Copyleft", claiming that all information 'should be free'. If it costs 'nothing' to reproduce it, then people should be free to do so, since that 'doesn't harm anyone else'. (Personally I support the idea of allowing content creators to choose to release their works into the world while letting the world do with it as they please. That is fine and good, and honestly kind of great in many ways. What I'm not remotely a fan of is the idea that this concept should be forced onto everyone and everything. Because that's just not cool.)