4 ms·

"Popularity" really isn't the point. He's going after people who are profiting off his copyrighted work. I know casual copyright infringement is the norm on th

by TillE 12y ago

"Popularity" really isn't the point. He's going after people who are profiting off his copyrighted work. I know casual copyright infringement is the norm on the internet (eg, distributing images from god knows where), and maybe that's okay, but you've certainly crossed an ethical line when you've started selling it without permission.

alistairjcbrown 12y ago
The irony being that even the article had an image from god knows where > Image Credit: Adam Sandler (Unknown, please let me know!)
ajuc 12y ago
It's not illegal or evil, but it's bad style. The value of the image is 99.9% associations it aquired thanks to the "copyright is bad" culture using it under assumption that it is public domain. Changing it now is bad style, and it sets bad example for others that may take this further. I know slippery slope isn't a very strong argument, but it is still valid concern. I wonder if 4chan should adopt GPL-like licencing.
- girvo 12y ago
  I agree it's not evil, but in some cases it's definitely illegal. Whether that's a good or bad thing, I pass no judgement on.
- userbinator 12y ago
  NC-SA, which oddly enough doesn't actually exist as a real Creative Commons license, would be more similar to what 4chan users treat memes as - non-commercial and share-alike, but no attribution nor any other the other restrictions.
ekianjo 12y ago
> but you've certainly crossed an ethical line when you've started selling it without permission. The troll face would have NEVER become popular if it was not free to distribute in the first place. It's not this guy who made it popular by himself, it's the 4chan and subsequent communities who did - in that sense, what it became does not belong to him at all.
- wlesieutre 12y ago
  It could have done just as well with a noncommercial license attached to it, I don't think the availability of trollface t-shirts has much to do with its initial spread.
wyldfire 12y ago
> casual copyright infringement is the norm on the internet (eg, distributing images from god knows where) Many of the uses you describe are covered under Fair Use (and then therefore are not infringement).

by TillE 12y ago

alistairjcbrown 12y ago

The irony being that even the article had an image from god knows where > Image Credit: Adam Sandler (Unknown, please let me know!)

ajuc 12y ago

It's not illegal or evil, but it's bad style. The value of the image is 99.9% associations it aquired thanks to the "copyright is bad" culture using it under assumption that it is public domain. Changing it now is bad style, and it sets bad example for others that may take this further. I know slippery slope isn't a very strong argument, but it is still valid concern. I wonder if 4chan should adopt GPL-like licencing.

girvo 12y ago
I agree it's not evil, but in some cases it's definitely illegal. Whether that's a good or bad thing, I pass no judgement on.
userbinator 12y ago
NC-SA, which oddly enough doesn't actually exist as a real Creative Commons license, would be more similar to what 4chan users treat memes as - non-commercial and share-alike, but no attribution nor any other the other restrictions.

ekianjo 12y ago

> but you've certainly crossed an ethical line when you've started selling it without permission. The troll face would have NEVER become popular if it was not free to distribute in the first place. It's not this guy who made it popular by himself, it's the 4chan and subsequent communities who did - in that sense, what it became does not belong to him at all.

wlesieutre 12y ago
It could have done just as well with a noncommercial license attached to it, I don't think the availability of trollface t-shirts has much to do with its initial spread.

wyldfire 12y ago

> casual copyright infringement is the norm on the internet (eg, distributing images from god knows where) Many of the uses you describe are covered under Fair Use (and then therefore are not infringement).