[Photo] Should I be flattered?

Politech has an item from the San Diego Union Tribune where, it seems Wal-Mart won't print digital images that, in the opinion of it's managers and employees are "too professional" to have been taken by the submitting photographer. Basically, it boils down to their fear of being sued for copyright violations.

Now, some of these photographers are going elsewhere, but it's funny Wal-Mart won't process images from products they sell if the resulting quality is decent.

So, what to do? There's no apparent violation of infringement. Is Wal-Mart checking the EXIF comments or IPTC data? Digital watermarks? Or is just that some photographers put © Their Name somewhere in the visible image. Why does this necessarily cause question? [1] Would they know any better if there was a Creative Commons license link instead? Who knows. But, I find it interesting to hear reports that Wal-Mart is giving people the third degree for submitting nice pictures through their service.

Now, if I send my photos through Wal-Mart, and they refuse to print them, should I be flattered, even if security escorts me from the premises? If they do print them, should I be insulted? Perhaps it's just better to avoid the monolith altogether. One of my co-workers pointed out Mpix.com as a no-hassle, quality printing service. Still, for a company trying to repair it's image, attacking customers as IP pirates isn't in the playbook under "smart."