Okay, okay, I'm not saying that all investigations are worthless, I was just offering a hypothetical case that could have had place in this world, I didn't mean myself personally, it could be any person, right? I was only asking hypothetical questions, that's all, please don't kill me
Don't worry too much. It just that forging owner ship of these things like this is just kinda very very difficult to do. Even if it hypothetical, it is just very very unlikely. You can't really build your argument on such flimsy stuff.
Here it is... a... above?.. When people don't take precautions and then say it's not their fault?.. Kinda?.. Okay, just... Forget it.
In the first place, there is no precautions in the internet that works. There have been many attempts before and now, like disabling right click (right click -> save image) and selection or install DRMs (and we still have these things now). Youtube once constantly change its site to prevent download of their videos. So many things have been tried. But, it is the internet, people can just make screenshots, strip away the DRM, record the screen, etc.. All the 'precautions' and all of them failed. The only thing that these 'precautions' do is burden people.
And you very much know (as you are oft to use like with the investigation discussion) that these precautions are not perfect and can fail. So, by your logic, these crap are even more useless, right?
Yes, I know I do bad things. Don't you do bad things? Doesn't that guy out there do bad things? Everyone does. Sometimes intentionally, sometimes not. The fact is, please hear me out, I just don't consider using other people's artworks or music pieces for my personal purposes bad. It's just an opinion. You don't have to listen to it. I don't advice anyone to do so. I just say. It's as simple as that. I don't insist on anything. Well, at first I was trying to prove that I'm not entirely wrong, but now I don't.
Copyrights actually allow personal use, so, yes it is okay. It is not bad, well, it is not illegal. There are other cases where you are allowed to use artwork even without asking for permission (like making a review).
However, what we have here is not personal use. They are using an artwork for a book cover to a book that the author get money from (from Patreon). That is certainly not personal use anymore.
Second, I don't advise anyone to do what I do. At least I didn't mean to advise, and if I sounded like giving an advice, it was done accidentally.
You are advising actually. Look at this:
But you don't make money on your books, right? So what copyright problems could possible be there? I use a lot of pictures from both Deviantart and Pinterest, always have, and there's never been a reason for someone to remind me of that those pictures belong to someone. Don't worry about that. I've never worried, and I've never had problems.
Though I know that you might not have realized that placeintime makes money from his work.
Even then, it is advised not to do this for book covers. There things aren't really personal anymore.
I was only speaking up, and if that hurt someone's feelings or opinions, I'm sorry for that.
The problem here is you are advising someone to do something that might put them into legal trouble. It is not just someone's feeling or opinion that are in danger here. It is actual people's career, life and reputation. This is why I'm kinda harsh.
Third, reality and hypothetical case are different things. When I speak for myself, I mean what I'd do. And when I use myself as an example, I don't mean that I will or can do what I say I do. I'm just an example which I use so that no one is offensed. Maybe it's too difficult to understand, but please try to understand.
You are telling someone to do what you would do. I quoted what you said above.
And no one is offended here, it is just that, it is actually illegal to do that. Maybe it is difficult to see how is it illegal, especially if you don't get caught, but it is. And people doing that are just risking themselves.
One is about my personal opinion that I've tried to prove that is based on the statement that people don't do any harm to creators by using their works without their permission as long as they don't claim rights for somebode else's work.
Uh . . . No.
In the first place, most don't attribute the creators. By not saying who the creator is, people would assume that it is yours or maybe bought it. You might not be claiming somebody's work but you don't attribute the creator either (which sometimes is essentially like you claiming the work as your own or that it is in Public Domain).
Second, as I said before, copyright is there help creators benefit from their creations before it is wrenched out of their hands (go into Public Domain). By widely distributing their works, especially without attribution, the creator can't reap the benefits and the recognition that they should have from their creations. The only one who benefited here from their work is you.
And third, many people don't even need your permission only that you attribute them and maybe put up links to their sites. There are actually a few very generous people out there who waived their rights and put their work in Public Domain or other permisive licenses.
Second case is about that copyright thing where I've tried to imagine a situation in which any copyright can be easily stolen and proven in court if a thief is creative and clever enough. I was only saying all that crap in my useless attempt to prove that anything posted on Internet is not protected by a creator's brand or sign and can only be protected by a license, a document or whatever - by an official paper proving the ownership.
Okay, look here. It is only your imagination! It is useless to only use your fantasies. Don't base your argument on what is not real! Just like you argue about investigations doesn't work sometimes so it is wrong to trust it to work all the time, it is also wrong to take the polar opposite, and that it fails all the time. The answer is at neither end of the extremes.
And actually, I said it before, there was a time when Copyrights doesn't exist. Anyone can make copy of anything and do whatever they want with it. To me, that actually isn't that bad but it does make it harder for the creators to actually profit from their works. You wrote a book and sell some . . . then some publisher would just copy your work and publish thousands of copies of it thereby diminishing the value of your work and not even profit from it except that few initial sales. You can't get them to court and take a share of the profits and stop them because there is no law against it. You can't do anything about it.
Though, I say, the modern copyright laws does have its problem. For one, they lasted for too long.
If something of what I've said is still unclear, I'm sorry but I won't continue and you can think whatever you want of me, I just want to go and have a cup of tea.
Thank you everyone and excuse me if I have offended someone or stressed someone out. I didn't intend to.
What you are saying is actually clear, I just don't agree with them.
Still, it was a very nice discussion. Kudos.?
