Look at this:
A company wants to change their logo.So they put out and ad to all and sundry with fine art skills that they're having a competition to get a new logo.They give you a rough idea of how it should look like.(Fred wants you to go in there and play a guitar,as opposed to say,a violin).They tell you it shouldn't have any similarity with their current logo,coz hey,that's what they're changing(Fred says not to play bizkit pieces.He want's original material).They'll tell you that all submissions made to them will become their property,and by entering to this competiton,you're agreeing to those terms(Fred says to sign that thing people were made to sign,about copyrights and all.And hey,if you own copyrights to something,you can use it however you want,right?That's the meaning of copyrights,right?).The company promises an award of so much to however wins(Fred is promising you bizkit membership).
Now,the company refuses to say who won.Or they say that none of the submissions weren't good enough(they reserve the right of judging quality,they reserve the right of refusing any or all entries without giving a reason,they set out all these conditions in the ad,and entering the competition binds you to those conditions).
Then you see you logo submission intheir letterheads or something.Can you say anything?Trendkillah thinks you can't coz,hey,it said so in the contract.Did you win the competition?NO.The company said so,and they'd reserved the right to say so.Who owns the logo?The company,duh!!The contract said so.
If this scenario was to unfold in a real court of law,somebody would be made to pay.
That is real life.No legal theory.Real life.
Ever heard of somebody being sentenced to a day in prison,for something like murder,because the circumstances of the case dictate he doesn't go in for the usual 10,20 years,but the law requires he be jailed if found guilty,so the judge puts him away for a day?
Or a guy commits a crime on which there's no life imprisonment.But the particular acts are so severe,the judge puts him away for 300 years?
The law is not as straight forward asyou seem to think it is.The actual truths are the ones that count.
And if in this case,Fred wanted to rip people off,if he had no real intention of hiring a guitarist,if he's using some tricky means to obtain copyrights from unsuspecting guitarists,as opposed to simply asking people to come in and then paying for the pieces that impress him,that would be strealing.And a sober court of law would find the case as such,that contract notwithstanding.
Look for a lawyer friend and ask about these things.
Or go to a forrum for lawyers,put this story forth(perhaps in a nutshell,with a link to the full story),and then listen to their views.
I'm sure you'll get some enlightment.
And by the way,I'm not a lawyer.
