I can see a legitimate use such as someone not giving permission or producers unable to get clearance to use a persons image on TV or covering up a license plate to protect privacy but somethings just seems silly. For example I saw on program where a hat logo was digitized. Before it was covered I noticed it was a NY Mets logo. Guess a Yankee fan did not want it seen. Numerous times I'll see logos on clothing digitized. No free publicity? Or, are producers so worried about law suits if a product is seen in a bad light. I caught that silly Jessica Simpson program once on MTV where she and her husband go to the Kentucky Derby. Everytime they cut to the big screen in the infield any image of the race on the screen was blurred. I know that NBC has broacast rights to the race but does a few seconds violate "fair use"? Kinda silly to watch our "heros" cheering to a digital blur. How about seeing a turned on TV in the background that is blurred out. You get the idea. I'm I just being silly or has this practice gotten carried away. If there are any lawyers out there, is there a difference in showing faces in a crowd in a news context such as people standing behind a reporter and faces that may be caught in a "reality show" where I see most instances of blurring. I do know that in a sporting event there is a statement on tickets saying that you give permission to have your likeness broadcast as a condition of admission.