I agree with you on this. I think the article would have been much better if he had focused on the fact that it wasn't just taking the original image directly a

I agree with you on this. I think the article would have been much better if he had focused on the fact that it wasn't just taking the original image directly and modifying it but making a brand new image based on the original. The pixalated image seems to have been hand drawn. I would like to know if taking an image like the one of Miles Davis and making a bust of it would be considered copyright infringment? If that is then the pixalated image is also infringment, if it isn't I don't see why the pixaleted image would also not be infringement. Is it the medium change that is the difference? I find this stuff confusing because then every time someone remakes that famous image of Marilyn Monroe with a look alike they are infringing.