You question is utterly pointless, as I already answered in saying I wouldn't enter because I don't like the T&C's.
However, I am not the rest of the population, and as I keep repeating because the simple and essential point in all this is constantly being missed, it is up to the individual what they do, if they are happy with the T&C's then good luck to them. If others aren't then don't enter it.
Like it or not, it's BA's ball, they can make up any rules they like, which they have. What they do to enforce those is a different matter, and frankly I am not convinced that they would be as prescriptive as some assume they will be. I'd also question some of the scare stories being touted. But thats a different subject. This is a large fuss being made by people who have decided that anyone who wants to enter this competition are somehow stupid, or find comprehension difficult. In actual; fact its about personal freedom to do what people like provided they agree with the terms, and not have that choice dictated to by those who've chosen to not do something.
It's not utterly pointless, but I'll concede it's a point I'm failing to get across, so one last attempt before I move on.
I'm going to start with your last point.
In actual; fact its about personal freedom to do what people like provided they agree with the terms, and not have that choice dictated to by those who've chosen to not do something.
I agree 100%. But this is
not the point I'm making.
Let's try an analogy. Something both true and close to my heart; my son has recently booked his driving theory test. He did so online. He Googled it, selected the top most result in Google, went onto an official looking site and paid £50 to book his test. Job done. He knew he was booking a theory test, his free choice, £50 seemed quite normal for him based on the other costs associated with learning to drive so he willingly parted with the cash.
Now my son can be a bit of a cocky sod, so suffice to say, no revision, so he failed his theory first time around.
Three months later, it's time to re-book, but he's a bit short of cash so I offer to pay. Off we go again, onto Google, search, but wait... I'm a bit more savvy than my delightful offspring when it comes to these things having spent many a year dealing with phishing sites. I notice the top result is a paid advert, and while it does take you to a very official government style site, I know it's not the official one. So I pick the official site of the list, and low and behold, it's a mere £25 for the theory test.
Now if I follow your line of reasoning, I should sit down, shut up and do nothing at all to raise awareness that the first site is essentially ripping people off. Sure it books the test for you, but it has no added value at all over the official site, it's just a paid for honey pot to grab £25 from people who don't know any better - but hey, it's their
choice to pay £50.
These are not stupid people, they are just less knowledgable than others in the area of how much a test should cost and that these sites exist. Is it not the right thing to do to try to educate and inform people so they can make a better choice (better in this case being saving £25)?
This
is the point I am making. With an understanding of what handing over copyright actually means, I consider BA's terms a bit of a rip off, and I think people should be made aware of what they are really giving up when then enter.
By acting as an apologist for BA you're just masking the issue. What BA might or might not let you do with the photo you used to own before you entered it is irrelevant. The point is BA, by taking copyright from a great many people who won't understand what it really means are no better than the example above. It's unnecessary and particularly bad form from a major corporation.
I repeat one final time - this is not about freedom to choose. It is only about raising awareness to enable informed choices to be made.