MicrostockGroup

Whatalife,

I didn't mean the doll was a copy of a Barbie, but a doll of the same type of a Barbie or a Suzy or a Polly, but possibly not a US-brand one, therefore the description as "generic". I just don't find it correct to have this accepted, especially as this is just the doll, not a girl playing with a doll or something like that.

RT, I have wikied the "isolated" terms, and in a note I commented about the copyright.  It is not my problem if this is copyrighted, I just don't understand how can this be accepted these days.

Regards,
Adelaide

Sorry when you wrote:

 "But mind you, this is not my concern, the copyright matter above is."

I presumed you worked for Barbie or Mattell or whoever makes the doll and wanted to do something about the copyright infringement, if it was just curiosity I suggest you never look through Dreamstime they have the worst selection of copyrighted images I've ever seen.

In this instance maybe you should PM the contributor and give them a heads up, maybe they didn't know.