flyteck wrote:Harpy• wrote:Minimanta: so, by your reasoning (the fact that the artist doesn't lose the original work no matter what is taken), it is alright for one to copy a published book, to record a song identical to one previously published, to claim something as their own when it isn't, since the original artist loses nothing.
That is incredibly false.
Want to put my 2 cents about this in.
I think it's more like singing someone's song to friends, or reading a book allowed. There was no profit from it. Although it id wrong to trace, if the photo's owners have no problems with it (they have been asked, I don't know if any answers are in yet), I see nothing wrong with it. It would effectively be stock photo usage.
But this thread isn't about changing the lines because of art theft. It's about changing them for unity. So instead of adding to the 150 pages about art theft, lets change back to the correct topic and discuss unity.
/endtwocents
That's the thing though. CS is making a profit from this, even if it's indirectly. CS is a profit making site. There is a shop where people buy C$ using real money, and they make money from advertisements. No they don't make a profit directly from the traced lines, but the fact remains that the lines are part of the site and the site makes a profit. It's fine to use a reference if you credit the original artist for their work, but the artist claimed those lines as completely her own and no credit was given to the photographer.