I had to check your profile page – it says you are in the United States. I had to check to insure that this was not a language issue – apparently it is not, therefore your delusional fantasy that I’ve “told you what to do,” in regards to your own art must be a mental aberration – because clearly I have not instructed you what to do at all.
I’ve merely pointed you to valid sources of information and informed you of the facts.
Feel free to wallow in your fantasy of victimization – hopefully you will stop for a moment and consider why facts disturb you so, but frankly I doubt it.
Just be assured of one thing, continue to lie to me about words I’ve written and I will continue to respond, with the facts, so perhaps you best take my advice son, and block me.
Is Type1arts guilty of copyright infringement? Yes.
The following information is found at about.deviantart.com/policy/co… under the heading:
“What is Copyright Infringement?”
To simplify this question, copyright infringement occurs when you do certain things with a creative work which someone else produced without first getting the proper permission.
Some examples of copyright infringement (this is only a partial listing) can include:
1. Placing someone else's photograph or creative work online without proper permission.
2. Using a creative work commercially without permission.
3. Adapting someone else's creative work found in one medium to another medium, such as making a book into a movie or a photograph into a painting.
4. Modifying or editing a creative work without proper permission.
– from Copyright Policy about.deviantart.com/policy/co…
Here are the facts: On March 18, 2014, Type1arts placed a comment on one of my images stating his intent to post it to his tumbler account. I responded within 17 minutes of his comment ordering him to cease and desist, and informing him of my right to refuse him permission to re-post my artwork.
Despite my notice Type1arts has posted my artwork without authorization on his tumbler account. As of this date further actions are underway.
I recognize that it is up to you as the artist to decide if you want to permit Type1arts to re-post your artwork, but consider the following: if this user has no respect for your right to control the placement of your work, what other violations of your rights might this user commit?
Consider and act as your judgment dictates.
You obviously do not appreciate my concern very much judging by your response below. Which is fine, your prerogative.
I filed a DMCA Take Down Notice (an official notification under Section 512(c) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (”DMCA”) on Friday, March 21, at 9 am local time.
I received confirmation of the action taken this morning at 9 am local time.
I checked the url where Type1arts had illegally posted my work – and can confirm the work has been taken down.
Note: Over a span of 7 days Type1arts failed to read, heed, or respond to my order not to post my property on his site. He failed to respond to all e-mail contacts during this time. He was on Deviant Art every day according to his activity log. Only after action had been taken did he belatedly contact me in regards to the issue- informing me (lamely) after the fact that my property had been removed from his site.
This is the character of the individual involved.
1. Copyright is a point of law – not belief.
A work is not automatically licensed creative commons – my work is proprietary. So, no, his action was not legal.
If you are a professional photographer then you know the industry standard is to acquire written permission before you re-post someone else’s intellectual property. I am surprised you even suggest otherwise.
Copyright law defines re-posting an intellectual property without permission as copyright infringement.
Deviant Art has an excellent policy page which outlines copyright law, available here: about.deviantart.com/policy/co…
Your opinion is of no interest to me, the facts are available at the link.
2. There is no “witch-hunt” involved. Type1arts posted my art after I ordered him not to. This is a fact.
Using Type1art’s activity log I have alerted others who’s art was re-posted of this fact so that they may know the character of the individual involved and make their own choices.
3. I pointed people to where valid sources of information are located. There is no “waving my beliefs” involved.
If you do not care to know the facts – that is fine, your choice.
I’ve acted to secure the work I own rights to, what you do is not my concern.
A point of reason: if you think re-posting art (illegally) to a site with no foot-traffic, a site with no index (only a continuous scroll of images arbitrarily arranged with no context or form) is “exposure” … well, obviously there is nothing I can say to credit such thinking.