Consolidated White Mage 4.0 Feedback Thread

[KisaiTenshi]

Stealing implies claiming credit for work you did not produce. Had Ama posted, "look at the comic I drew!" You would have a point. She did not, but merely made a parody using said work with no claim of ownership. That is fair use per the description I quoted. You really need to stop speaking about things you don't understand.

You're the one who doesn't understand what they are talking about. I'm not arguing about the contents of the comic, I'm telling you that it is jerk-tier behavior to steal an image from a website, modified or not, and post it somewhere else and not link back to the source. One of the people I have worked with in the past sent invoices to websites who took her images.

[Keridwyn]

You're the one who doesn't understand what they are talking about. I'm not arguing about the contents of the comic, I'm telling you that it is jerk-tier behavior to steal an image from a website, modified or not, and post it somewhere else and not link back to the source. One of the people I have worked with in the past sent invoices to websites who took her images.

There is a watermark on the comic though telling you where and who it came from originally. Even were the comic image itself a link, many folks who viewed it may not click. Unless the artist codes their site to make right click impossible this will keep happening until we get technology that pays the artists for us.

[KisaiTenshi]

There is a watermark on the comic though telling you where and who it came from originally. Even were the comic image itself a link, many folks who viewed it may not click. Unless the artist codes their site to make right click impossible this will keep happening until we get technology that pays the artists for us.

Link to the comic page, not hotlink to the image.

If you look at the site itself it's https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

You are free to:

Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material

Under the following terms:

Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

Somehow a few of you are trying to find something wrong with what I said when it's indefensible to not link to the original source, always cite your sources and what you changed. It would be different if the original artist was dead, or their site was dead, or they no longer want to be associated with their older artwork, but none of that is true.

Reddit has a very bad habit of doing this, as they typically encourage their users to swipe content and post it to imgur so that the original artist doesn't find out they stole it.

I was not accusing Ama of any wrongdoing, only to link the source. Had Ama not indicated what the change was, people would keep posting it on the forum without knowing that it had been edited.

I tell you what, feel free to hit up sites like imgur, pinterest etc and carry on with this crusade.

Why do you think I even mentioned this in the first place? I send a an email every week to imgur just to remove content for a single artist that is routinely stolen because the trolls like to raid their patreon.