4 ms·

Here they are still expressing their willingness to infringe copyrights. They're still unaware of the license of the work at this point. They're only lamenting

Here they are still expressing their willingness to infringe copyrights. They're still unaware of the license of the work at this point. They're only lamenting that the wrong party has lodged a complaint.

misnome 9y ago
> They're still unaware of the license of the work at this point No, they actually link to the original work, which if you follow, it's licence is pretty clear. Not reading the article the first time is fine (and common), but repeatedly insisting that people who have are in the wrong is kind of inexcusable.
ghusbands 9y ago
No, the page they link to clearly licenses it freely and they and their artist (who kept "meticulous records") were clearly aware of it. Though, their tone elsewhere does indicate that they would have happily copied it, so you are partially right.