In reply to Damo:
There was a case a while back (not climbing or landscape related) where some guy found his photos being used on a t-shirt. It's alluded to in this article, I believe they pulled the shirts and paid up quite handsomely after he called them out:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/us-news-blog/2013/feb/05/instagram-us...
I think you're quite right about owners not being bothered to deal with it. People looking to make money assume they can get away with it. However, where would you start? The vast majority of photos on the web are amatuer rubbish* that noone would ever dream of making money out of, and therefore not really worth* protecting. But that attitude perpetuates the idea that all photos are fair game, and that professional photographers can be exploited.
It's not like there's a clear distinction between amatuer and professional photographers these days, I'd regard myself as somewhere in the middle and would be surprised but angry to find that a photo of mine had been used to make money. On the other hand I'd be quite happy (still surprised) to discover that someone had downloaded a photo of mine just for their own enjoyment.
Not sure if I've expressed myself brilliantly there. Basically, the attitude of the masses who take photos devalues the public perception of profressionals, but that's not an accusation of the 'masses' because why should they care?
*I'm not suggesting it would be morally right to use anybody's photos simply because they're not profressional quality, or that those photos don't have value to the owner.
