The Opus Art Supplies link that used Kandice's name is now gone. Why would that be? Mere coincidence?
However, this page [link removed] promoting the $55 workshops, twice shows a painting, presumably done by the instructor, that clearly is a substantially similar copy of Kandice's original. This is not teaching, this is copying and using for advertisement. I believe this unauthorized copy, published to the public and offered for a class, constitutes copyright infringement--exactly as plaintiffs allege in the Duncanson v. Wine and Canvas case.
I apologize--if I had more thoroughly investigated earlier, we could have avoided all of the debate about whether or not "teaching" is fair use. Regardless of that argument, publishing an obvious copy of someone's original on a web page advertising workshops and parties IS infringement.
Kandice's original on the left.
[Update: Since this thread began, the infringing images have been removed, so I have deleted the link.]
For anyone interested and still reading here is a crash course on copyright for artists from an attorney with decades of experience in the field. "... in the vast majority of cases, it is the possibility of a lawsuit, rather than actual litigation, that gives you the bargaining power to stop an infringement, and often, to collect some money in settlement of your claim.