Politics

Stop Supporting Conservative Websites That Shamelessly Steal Our Art; Update with Petition

Right-of-change-THEIVES

So I usually don’t do this, because there is a lot of thievery in the blogger world, and a lot of it you either can’t prove, or it’s just best to let go. If I tracked down every person that stole my posts or artwork, I’d probably have no time to write those posts or compose that art. But in this case, it’s so blatant, and from a large and popular conservative website, that I just can’t stay quiet.

The Facebook page for “Right Change” shamelessly stole my work, redid the text to make it look original, and then added their logo after taking mine off:

Right-of-change-1

For their thieving efforts, they got more than three thousand shares of my image, which enhances their page.

This is not a small thing – stealing an image steals my work and lets them benefit from my talent, and it happens to all artists, but it should absolutely NOT happen in the conservative community where we’re supposed to be about private rights as one of our philosophical pillars.

So I’m asking you to help me out by going to their page and demanding they take down their stolen image and post my original with my logo. They haven’t responded at all yet, so even a complaint to Facebook would be in line.

Don’t support these pathetic shameless thieves.

Another thing you could do to help the cause is retweet my original, and post on Facebook to make sure more people see it with my logo and not the plagiarized version:

UPDATE!

Travis Clay has posted a petition on Change.Org to try to pressure the owners to take the stolen artwork down and replace with my original – please sign it!

  • Lucky Pierre

    Damn gringos be stealing everything!

  • http://soopermexican.hammerapp.com Soopermexican

    That’s what I said!!!

  • http://powip.com vermontaigne

    Stealing shit is the new conservatism.

  • http://www.theconservativevoices.com/ dmacleo

    shoot I retweeted one someone else retweeted, not sure if it was yours or not.
    damn.

  • FIRE THEM ALL- 2014

    Um, reposting your artwork also promotes it, but if you don’t want it reposted, that’s good too. I will make sure I never RT or share anything you do. Makes no sense. Anything I create is up for grabs because I want people to see it. Put your name and web address on it, that way they know where it came from.

  • jasonahart

    Did you miss the part where his watermark was cropped out? Reading is fundamental…

  • http://deadbuffalopodcast.blogspot.com/ DeadBuffalo Podcast

    Perhaps better logo placement is the answer. Check out some of my work and where I put my logo. With my artwork you can’t eliminate my logo without altering it noticeably.

  • http://aggiesprite.wordpress.com/ LC Aggie Sith

    Watermark the hell out of your art! I mean ALL OVER!!

    I expect some people to swipe art from others. Taking the artist’s name off is one thing. To place your own over another’s work is a whole new level. Doubly so from some who espouse conservative principles.

  • MicahStone

    Re-posting your art WITH YOUR LOGO is, of course, FREE publicity and a tacit acknowledgment that its’ WORTH re-positing. I agree that people who remove your logo and post are contemptible. Hopefully, the spineless-boehner led House will vote to hold such people in contempt, like they did the contemptible holder. (Certainly, we can all see how great and useful doing that was in holder’s case!)

  • Curt Pangracs

    Interesting. YOU take either common usage photographs or steal them from someone else, add what you think is witty, and you have heartburn when someone does it to you? Yeah, whatever. Ever heard the term “butthurt”?

  • NRPax

    Maybe if they had kept his logo on it and credited him for the original work, there wouldn’t have been a problem? Just sayin’…

  • Curt Pangracs

    How about you give attribution to the owner of the photographs you used for your original meme?

    Yeah…that’s what I thought.

  • Jimmie

    I shouldn’t have to say this to a grown-up person, but an image is not “up for grabs” just because it’s on the internet any more than a piece of art is “up for grabs” because it’s hung in public view on the wall of a museum.

  • Jimmie

    You should have some evidence that soop stole anything from anyone before you make the accusation. Also, you may want to brush up on the SotA of intellectual property, fair use, and places where folks can get pictures of public figures for their use completely free of charge (see also Flickr and Wikimedia Commons).

  • Curt Pangracs

    Interesting…what “accusation” are you talking about? He did exactly what I said – he either TOOK COMMON USE PHOTOGRAPHS or STOLE THEM FROM SOMEONE ELSE.

    Do you have a comprehension problem? I hear there’s an app for that…

  • Jimmie

    I comprehend just fine. When you say someone stole something, you have accused them of theft. I savvy English just fine. You, on the other hand, seem to have a problem where your fingers move a lot faster than the thinky parts of your brain.

    I could, of course be wrong. You could be having a bad day today and your apparent impulse control problems are an aberration. If that’s the case, I hope the day gets better for you and you return with an apology for soop.

    Have a good day!

  • http://soopermexican.hammerapp.com Soopermexican

    I have no problem with someone reporting my work as long as the credit stays with it.

  • ClairePK

    Curt- Once you have added your own creative touches to a photo (or group of photos) that you have a legal right to use, it becomes your own product, according to U.S. copyright law. To the extent that someone copies YOUR creative expression, it is infringement. The only question here is whether Sooper had a right to use those photos in his collage. Since this is a political/news blog, I’m pretty sure his use of the photos would be covered under the fair use exception. And since he transformed them into a collage with word-bubbles, it seems it would be protected. Oh, and it’s impossible to steal common usage (if by that you mean public domain) photos. By definition.

  • http://rexcrouch.com/ Rex Crouch

    I’m totally stealing this and reposting it :-)

  • Al_the_Fish

    Posted a complaint on the post, have you filed a copyright violation to FaceBook? Only you can, not us third parties.

  • John Eastborough

    Exactly. It’s nice when people share your work, but when they do this – https://twitter.com/joshua_abbott/status/439400274231177216 – you have to remind them that it was your time, effort, and above all, creativity, that went into making the image in the first place: https://twitter.com/johneastborough/status/439528071222149120

  • John Eastborough

    See that part where you said “add what you think is witty”? EXACTLY. It’s the ADDITION of content – whether another image, or textual context, or both – that transforms a random piece of data into something meaningful. That takes time, effort, and originality. And that time, effort, and originality should not be stolen and presented as someone else’s achievement.

    When an artist makes a painting – with “common usage” paints, brushes, and canvas – and someone else makes a copy & presents it as their own, would you also dismiss that as “yeah, whatever”? I don’t think so. Why should source images and letters of the alphabet be treated any differently?

  • John Eastborough

    No, you’re completely wrong. What he did was, take some commonly available materials and PUT THEM IN A NEW CONTEXT – using his own IDEAS and CREATIVITY. That is the value addition, and that is what should not be stolen.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkgA2rUAY-o Booker

    What a disgrace. Leeching is the behavior of leftists. I knew that these folks were frauds. I used to have them bookmarked. Not anymore.

  • daPenguin

    Soop is this another case? http://moonbattery.com/?p=43095

  • GET OFF MY LAWN!

    Incorrect. The plagiarism here is not the content of the photo. But the placement of the wording added to the photo. It was obvious that they thieves plagiarized Soopers idea. Using exact wording, no less. Now had they used the same stock images to produce their own content, they you would have an argument. As it stands your argument is invalid because your premise is flawed.

  • FIRE THEM ALL- 2014

    I admit to being guilty of slight modifications especially if I find something too disrespectful. It’s one thing to hammer the truth against someone because it needs to be done, but if it is about the president I draw the line at out right disrespect. He has enough things we can criticize without being vulgar or disrespectful. I am not willing to even share something that is too vile. However unless you took the picture you have no claims on it. I do leave the originator’s website and name in tact however.

  • John Eastborough

    Yes, modifications in order to remove something offensive, due to the context of the site/forum where it’s being republished, are perfectly fine. TheLookingSpoon did that to one of my works:

    http://www.thelookingspoon.com/83-2013/february-2013/4478-when-looking-at-liberal-vs-conservative-anti-rape-tips-it-s-weird-how-conservatives-are-considered-out-of-touch.html

    Here’s the original: http://impliedinference.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/liberal-anti-rape-tips-vs-conservative-anti-rape-tips/

    I completely understand why the TLS Moderator cropped out the bottom part of the left-side image, it may be too “X-rated” for some audiences. But even though he cut out that portion – he left my credit in there, even though he very easily could have cut it out. And I have absolutely zero problem with that kind of modification.

  • Joy

    Boohoo :)

  • Some Rabbit

    I seen an identical pic meme using “knock knock joke..Crimea River” text that had no brand on it at all. The word balloons are transparent so it isn’t a ripoff of your “phone call” shoop. Did you do that too?

    I’ve seen it at other sites but you can see it here:
    http://blurbrain.com/schmuck-putz-collection-memes/

  • Guest

    Let me be clear…whatever “they” did to this, they made it funnier. If I were the “originators” of the meme, I woul just shut-up and let it go, lest everyone realize how crappy the original was.

  • Guest

    Furthermore, it is absolutely clear that the site did NOT steal the original and just paste over it. Anyone with a minute of graphic design experience could tell.

  • Guest

    That’s the funny part – this site released something into the wild and are now whining about it. If they REALLY cared, they would have taken steps to protect it. Nothing but an attention whore site.

  • Curt Pangracs

    You do the same. Even creative commons use should be “attributed”. If you expect it from others, you should expect it from yourself.

  • Curt Pangracs

    You either protect it or expect it…to be stolen.

  • Pingback: Soopermexican Tired of Bloggers Who Steal His Work, Slap on Their Own Logo - Blur Brain

  • http://www.facebook.com/peter.boddie Peter Boddie

    Stealing images is bad.
    —Pilferer Pete, Chief Plagiarist, Pundit Pete Press Service

    http://www.punditpete.blogspot.com/

  • http://www.facebook.com/peter.boddie Peter Boddie

    I have to admit, I borrowed some artwork once and then added to it. My bad.