[BigJohn]

If all the TGP does is to sell the ability to turn off skim AND their skim is such that a surfer has a high chance of seeing your gallery then there is nothing wrong with this. The user has a choice... view your gallery and take the chance of getting skimmed somewhere else or pay to see it every time you click. The access to the gallery is still free in this case.

Google charging to turn off ads would be doing exactly the same thing. Your link is still free, just as you intended it regardless of whether a surfer pays to have ads turned off. Google is constantly adding and removing links, I find it difficult to believe that if you requested that your site be removed from their listing that they wouldn't honor the request.

The problem that arises is that once you say it's okay for someone to use your content and bandwidth in a "charge for skimless" TGP, is not what the honest webmasters will do, it's what cheaters and abusers will do. What stops the TGP owner from setting the skim so high that there is virtually no chance of seeing your gallery unless the fee is paid or designing his TGP
to look like a paysite and "skimming" the thumbnails (which he now calls samples) directly to a join page that charges 9.95 for access to thousands of pictures and videos?

This "pay for skimless" tgp, running autogallery or something similar, is now using your bandwidth and content to build a paysite and profit off of your work. Do you feel this is an okay thing for someone to do?

By not executing your rights as copyright holder in the first place, you make it more difficult to enforce them at all.