Comics
This is a community for everything comics related! A place for all comics fans.
Rules:
1- Do not violate lemmy.ml site-wide rules
2- Be civil.
3- If you are going to post NSFW content that doesn't violate the lemmy.ml site-wide rules, please mark it as NSFW and add a content warning (CW). This includes content that shows the killing of people and or animals, gore, content that talks about suicide or shows suicide, content that talks about sexual assault, etc. Please use your best judgement. We want to keep this space safe for all our comic lovers.
4- No Zionism or Hasbara apologia of any kind. We stand with Palestine 🇵🇸 . Zionists will be banned on sight.
5- The moderation team reserves the right to remove any post or comments that it deems a necessary for the well-being and safety of the members of this community, and same goes with temporarily or permanently banning any user.
Guidelines:
- If possible, give us your sources.
- If possible, credit creators of each comics in the title or body of your post. If you are the creator, please credit yourself. A simple “- Me” would suffice.
- In general terms, write in body of your post as much information as possible (dates, creators, editors, links).
- If you found the image on the web, it is encouraged to put the direct link to the image in the ‘Link’ field when creating a post, instead of uploading the image to Lemmy. Direct links usually end in .jpg, .png, etc.
- One post by topic.
view the rest of the comments
It's removing attribution of the make of the maker
in what way is this stealing?
Would you scrub picassos sign off one of his artworks? This is the same
You're not answering my question. Scrubbing off picassos signature would be different, because it would destroy the physical artwork. I wouldn't have a problem with someone digitally removing his signature from a digital copy of the artwork and then distributing that online.
How is that not ruining the art but removing Picasso’s signature would be? I agree art should be free but that doesn’t mean we should make it easier to steal from artists that should be getting paid even if their art is distributed for free.
If you posted a Picasso piece and went thru the extra steps to remove his signature even digitally & then post it it’s kinda like a ripoff, you’re just unnecessarily removing the credit from the person who actually did the work.
I didn't say that removing picassos signature would not ruin the art. I said that physically destroying the artpiece is way different from copying a file and then modifying that copy. Copying digital art is not stealing. This mindset just enables stupid anti-piracy and copyright laws that will always harm the honest consumer
Wtf are you saying?
That has nothing to do with copyright, if you remove the signature of a famous Picasso art everyone will still know that is a Picasso art but from a random on the internet you're just making things difficult for the artist to spread their work for NO FUCKING REASON. You're having more work to just fuck an artist to gain absolute nothing.
posting a comic without the signature is stupid. its not wrong though and the poster is not morally obligated to spread the artists name
I disagree, if the art is good enough for them to share, surely the artists name is as well. Seems pretty cut and dry, morally.
Maybe people should be morally obligated to not do stupid things for no fucking reason.
imo, people should not be obligated to anything and i dont believe in morals. id like to conclude this discussion since i have nothing more to gain from it. thanks for sharing your opinion though
“ i dont believe in morals” prob the craziest and dumbest shit I’ve ever heard. lol. Off to gulag with you
Imagine standing for nothing and being proud of that fact.
Defending it when you could just not is also stupid
Attribution is not DRM
Why would you allineate an artist from their work? Being recognised for what oneself makes is one of life's pleasures
i totally agree with you. and i think they should have included the artists name, just not for all the same reasons that you have. i think its stupid not to post the artists name, not cropping out the name would mean less work for the poster and it would make it easier for readers to find more comics of the same artist. i dont think what the poster did is wrong though, and i am against trying to justify having to include the artists name based on some weird morals and capitalistic ideas.
Crediting someone for their work is not capitalistic. Also, the poster is not only not crediting the creator, but they get to have their username on all their posts. Is this not a form of credit stealing?