I was admiring the multitude of works within the tag art, when I saw this beautiful drawing ...
I said to myself "what a fantastic composition" "certainly is plagiarism".
and guess what?
oooo man its its the same!!!!
look at how fresh dew flows on the left and right
some small details in his previous posts
could you use your energy to mention the sources? what do you think about it?
"Congratulation for your art" @yakubenko
This is ilGiaguaro,
Reporting directly from the jungle.
Onwards!
do not worry! you do everything right! You're good at it, keep up the good work!
I wish you good luck in your creative work, draw more such beautiful women! I like the way you paint the flowers!
@daio many thanks kristina!
art paraphrasing
Source:
https://weheartit.com/entry/213298906
иди к черту, глупый
:(
The photograph you used as a reference is a copyrighted photograph by a professional Italian photographer, to monetize derivative works of said photograph you need the permission of the author, which you didnt even credit, let alone get permission to monetize derivative works of her photographs.
That author could pull a DMCA request to have the page of your post pulled from steemit, and could also sue you for copyright infringement.
So every drawing based on photo is plagiarism?
Every photo of a sculpture?
You think that an artist have to provide all sources of inspiration?
https://steemit.com/art/@mathowl/trolling-artist-njzyffwv
jaguar.force (ilgiaguaro) is one person's fake project created by a user called @walden (or @earnest in 2016).
Walden is a vulgar, aggressive, misogynistic, manipulative, compulsively lying and bullying tard that got banned in Steemcleaners discord, altogether with all his other accounts we know of.
He has been perpetually bullying and insulting Steemians since 2016.
walden is a moron, ignore that fool.
You are right.
It's just that some Steemians are not aware of his other accounts.
mmm ok, but what does it have to do with plagiarism?
and I'm another person ...
The above case is not a plagiarism Walden!
Just like multiple of other bullying cases that you have been sending us in private messages. And you were explained tens of times why these cases are not plagiarism.
And this is just another account of yours Walden and you will not fool anyone, you tard.
I see that you have just joined our Discord with ilgiguaro too.
I am kicking out and banning this new account just like I did ban your other account jaguar.force.
I don't know your friend Walden...
So you can scribble Walden?
It looks that you plagiarised it from here:
https://srotas24.lt/automobiliu-dalys/ratlankiai-ir-dalys/ratlankiai-su-padangomis/atsarginiai-ratai/motociklu-ratlankiai-padangos/ratas-atsarginis-atsargine-audi-a6-a-6-4g0-r19-14978543896.html
look behind noob ... there is a stamp of the municipality of Rome
Steemit users:
is it all plagiarism?
most of it is, yes
those that you accuse people who are not related to plagiarism! learn the law, then you can continue to do your work!
you make me think that I should also analyze your profile.....
@ilgiaguaro learn the law! then you will talk to me!
@ilgiaguaro What do you think the elephant is against that I wrote this picture?
original photo:
original of my oil painting:
photographers are artists like you, you have to mention the source !!
I do not have to specify. This is a picture!
yes, you have to credit the author of the photo or at least the photo, and you have to get permission from the author if you are going to monetize derivative works of the photograph.
In the case of this photograph, wich is a copyrighted photograph, the user needs permission from the author to monetize derivative works, we have contacted the photographer, a reknown Italian author and soon we and you all will hear from her too.
@gtg❤️
hi daio, i love your Profile <3!!!
don't follow those who plagiarize!
@ilgiaguaro This is not plagiarism! She draws a person from a photo! so do all the artists! Read the law of law!
The law says that if you are going to monetize derivative works of a copyrighted photograph you need permission from the author.
This is not called plagiarism! This is an art loan!
Plagiarism is taking the work of others and passing it as your own without crediting the authors. In this case the photographer created his work of art/composition, the user's work is completely based on the work of art of the photographer, a derivative work, and she doesnt credit the author, hence, its plagiarism.
The work being in a different art medium is irrelevant, since its clearly a derivative work regardless of the medium.
Additionally, she doesnt have permission to monetize derivative works of that copyrighted photograph, so she is also infringing copyright law.
hi @gtg yes...
if he uses the idea of another person, trying to hide himself, it is plagiarism.. especially when we talk about the exact same composition..
https://www.thoughtco.com/may-i-make-a-painting-of-a-photograph-2573673
hey boy stop! you're wrong!
This is not someone's idea! This is a portrait !
hhahaha
now they are called that?
IT WAS ALWAYS NAMED! ONCE AGAIN I REPEAT IT, THIS ART IS NOT COVERED WITH A PICTURE, THE ARTIST DRAWED THIS PORTRAIT ON THE PHOTO!
I can not understand, do you really do not understand?
Listen to me, I studied at art school for 6 years. We all drew from one photo, what is this called plagiarism? lol
This is not a personal idea of any of the artists. This is a picture by photo! I’m letting people paint a portrait to order. They send me a photo and I draw their image on the photo! Then by mail I send him this portrait for money, by the way!
Then this customer will order his portrait from someone else, he will draw another artist, and also to order for money. Is this your plagiarism?
if you use as reference the artwork of a photographer and do not credit the photographer you are claiming the whole work of art if you do not cite the photo/author. Additionally in order to monetize derivative works of a photograph you need permission from the photographer that took the photo.
in artschool you werent monetizing it, you were studying, here you are monetizing it, thats the difference.
you have the consent of the photos right?
here everyone has studied, or has to do with art..
the fact that at school artists posed for you, does not mean that you are free to get photos on the internet and copy them ..
This is not a copy! This is a portrait . God, you're so stupid. don't make me think that your brain is the size of a pea !!!!!
Actual artists on steemit do not agree with you:
https://steemit.com/art/@silviabeneforti/learning-day-by-day-thanks-the-great-artists
you can copy from any image you believe better, but we are always talking about copying
this is not a copy! This is a portrait! Anyone who wants to can draw this girl in the photo, I can also draw her. This is not someone's idea! This is a portrait!
mention the source?
She should not indicate the person she is painting! She does not draw from a drawing, she paints a portrait of a woman from a photograph!
then has her consent?
Not! the one who does not want her to draw, does not send his photos in the social network! This is stupid! Maybe the tree does not want me to draw it? Do I need the consent of a tree or a statue?
I don't see any plagiarism.
The photograph is copyrighted, hence, the user needs permission of the author to monetize derivative works, you should know this as a SteemCleaner, the author could easily pull a DMCA on steemit for this, and you know it. Additionaly the author of the photograph is not even credited, so yes, its plagiarism.
ok.... but it is obvious ..
she herself posted the photo not having cited it ..
look explain again! I have painted @ned
I painted him according to his photo!
it was also drawn by other Steemit users!
https://gateway.ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXvUscM9fV9oZK4z6X41QWP6jjtmH2yXZdgqSjfMZvGUs
and many more artists painted him. Is it plagiarism?
In that case no, cause that photograph of Ned is not known to be copyrighted.
hhaha) he didn't let me draw it
he is clearly not the author of the photograph of himself, and that photograph is not known to be copyrighted, as is the case with the photograph of the girl with the leaves.
If we are to denounce every artist that copied the Mona Lisa...
This is not the monalisa, in that case the author is obvious and doesnt need to be cited, additionally the author is dead, in this case the author is a living professional photographer that makes a living out of her photographs, the author was not credited and the user doesnt have permission to monetize derivative works from the photograph. @ilgiaguaro is right
Plagiarism is when a work is copied as it is (photo vs photo). Inspiration from other people's work is different and is not plagiarism.
Plagiarism is taking the work of others and passing it as your own without crediting the authors. In this case the photographer created his work of art/composition, the user's work is completely based on the work of art of the photographer, a derivative work, and she doesnt credit the author, hence, its plagiarism.
The work being in a different art medium is irrelevant, since its clearly a derivative work regardless of the medium.
Additionally, she doesnt have permission to monetize derivative works of that copyrighted photograph, so she is also infringing copyright law. This can easily result in a DMCA takedown notice, and you as a witness should know this.
Try to enforce copyright law on a blockchain, IF it applies.
No he isn’t
the work is clearly derivative and the photograph is copyrighted, so the user needs permission to monetize said derivative work, we are attempting to contact the actual author of the photograph so that you all hear it from her directly.
That’s great. Have fun with that.
and if a person is dead, for example a singer, then can one appropriate his songs?
the author being dead only changes the fact that you cannot get permission from him/her directly. if you sing a song passing it as your own that is someoneelse's then that would be plagiarismregardless of the author being dead or alive, plagiarism is passing the work of others as your own.
copyright on a photo, my art is not considered a photo!
whatever the medium you make your art is irrelevant, it is still a derivative work. the copyright of the photograph covers all derivative works in any medium.
Photo copyright! Nobody gave a photo of his own!
Excellent work!!
what a great thing is that he blames people! Let him first study the human rights! Why is he insulting me! ? I have the right to draw a portrait of this girl! All artists have the right to paint a portrait from a photograph!
I draw a portrait from the photo!
you're wrong! Remove the flags!
This is called a reference!
All artists can paint on this photo!
Yes, thats the picture you used as inspiration/reference/x, that photograph is by an Italian photographer named Marta, and is copyrighted, if you dont have permission from the author you cannot monetize derivative works of that photograph, additionally , you didnt even credited the author of the photograph.
I draw a portrait from the photo!
you're wrong! Remove the flags!
This is called a reference!
All artists can paint on this photo!
If you do not understand human rights, then do not stick your nose in what you are stupid!
No, no artist can use this photo as a reference to monetize derivative works without permission from the author, since the image is copyrighted.
This is my right to draw a portrait of a man from a photograph!
I can not forbid other artists to paint on the same photo!
I am waiting for an apology for your insults!
You will not receive any apologies, what you will receive is proof that you dont have the permission from the author of the photograph to monetize derivative works. We are already in contact with her.
Congratulations @ilgiaguaro! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPVote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!
Thanks for using eSteem!
Your post has been voted as a part of eSteem encouragement program. Keep up the good work! Install Android, iOS Mobile app or Windows, Mac, Linux Surfer app, if you haven't already!
Learn more: https://esteem.app
Join our discord: https://discord.gg/8eHupPq
Why is chaos created on Steemit ????????? All and sundry can oskarblyat other users.
my instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dashulya_yakubenko/
Congratulations @ilgiaguaro!
Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade for newcomers in the following category:
If you like my work to promote newcomers and give them more visibility on the Steem blockchain, consider to vote for my witness!
and what he insults artists for no reason, you also saw?
Dear @daio,
Personally, I do not see any insults in the post and even in the comments.
What I see is that there are different opinions about whether or not there is plagiarism.
Admittedly, the discussion is not very constructive since everyone simply camps on their positions. But we can not consider it as insults, even if I can imagine that you are feeling an offense.
The main goal of my hit-parade is not to report about the content of the posts, but how they perform on the blockchain. Even if it is about an "unpleasant" post, it is also a way of stimulating the debate by giving some attention to it.
He says that I am a rip-off! This is not an insult! read the meaning of the word - plagiarism !!!!!!!!!!!!!
plagiarism is attempting to pass the work of others as your own,
in this case the original work of art is the photograph, of which you then made a derivative work, without crediting the original work, hence, its plagiarism.
Additionally, you are violating the copyright law by monetizing the derivative work without permission from the author.
what is copyright? she painted a picture! this is no longer a picture! this is no longer a photo!
This is called artistic reciprocity!
There are no insults, only facts, the user based the piece on a photograph which is copyrighted, and since she doesnt have permission from the author of said photograph, she cannot monetize derivative works as this piece.
The fact that you are stupid and do not know the Law! What you read from the Internet will not help you! It is necessary not only to read, but also to understand the meaning of words!