• Passerby6497@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    If you post someone’s art and remove their watermark, you are stealing

    I couldn’t give two shits about sharing other’s work, just properly attribute it or fuck off.

      • Krauerking@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Acknowledgement of your peers and recognition for what you put out into the world is not nothing. Stop being an edgelord.

        • meowcar420@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          19 hours ago

          My opinion is, that you should be able to do whatever you want to a digital file. I don’t think it’s wrong to scold the poster for not including the artists name though

          • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            14 hours ago

            Yeah nobody’s arguing sharing digital files, hell I’m an avid pirate myself, but in this case it isn’t just “downloading The Godfather,” it’s downloading it, editing out the credits for literally no reason, and re-uploading it under my account on another site.

            Honestly with something like The Godfather it wouldn’t really matter, but with a much lesser known pet project B movie, even if the creators support piracy they’d like you to at least maybe see their name. This comic would be the latter, while you could safely trim the name off of like, Charles Shultz’s Peanuts, and assume people probably can figure it out.

      • knuk@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        18 hours ago

        There’s income related to making and sharing digital media. It’s not as simple as a simple monetary transaction, but there’s income in social media presence and exposure which can be converted into monetary income. In any case, by removing the signature, the person is intentionally cutting that income stream from the artist.

        It’s more difficult to argue that it’s stealing, since even though the person removing attribution from an artist is taking something from the artist, they’re not necessarily gaining it for themselves.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        19 hours ago

        You are stealing the credit they should get when people who aren’t familiar with the work see it. If you can’t handle that, you’re free to kindly fuck off or get absolutely dog piled for being wrong. As I stated before, I don’t care about content sharing as long as people are properly credited.

        Beep is a well known content thief who actively modifies works to remove the author attribution. That is effectively digital theft, and I don’t give a fuck what you think about the matter.

        • meowcar420@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          19 hours ago

          so you define stealing as not giving somebody something they deserve, based on your personal undefined moral standards?

          • AnotherUsername@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            18 hours ago

            The modified file does not significantly change the work, and does remove attribution. You should spend some time reading up on copyright, intellectual property, and creative commons, because you have obviously not done so if you think this is arbitrary.