Their claims that such copying would have been fair use are spurious at best. If they had copied that portion of the other image directly, it would have been co

Their claims that such copying would have been fair use are spurious at best. If they had copied that portion of the other image directly, it would have been copyright infringement. The fair use provisions are for specific circumstances, not just randomly copying. But they didn't copy it and had instead used a freely licensed common source, so they're in the clear, anyway.