Comments
Kwauhn t1_iyev005 wrote
Why are you upset about this? You gave them a better idea for a title and they used it. What's wrong with that?
you-are-not-yourself t1_iyexor2 wrote
Their denial of attribution
Halvus_I t1_iyexvsb wrote
Attribution is noise.
you-are-not-yourself t1_iyeztpb wrote
Not to an original author. Lack of attribution is plagiarism, an unethical act. To say nothing of OP denying this when questioned.
Halvus_I t1_iyf02nf wrote
> Lack of attribution is plagiarism, an unethical act.
Depends wholly on context. Should parody have to attribute? No.
Further, your definition is wrong. Plagiarism is a form of fraud. Lack of attribution alone is not fraud. You have to affirmatively claim the work as your own.
you-are-not-yourself t1_iyf0fjj wrote
Sure, parody's different, and public domain isn't covered by copyright so it's not like laws are being broken, but to have the original commenter show up here & OP deny attribution to their face seems like ethical misconduct.
Edit: Also this is clearly not a parody of the comment, it's a rip of the comment.
you-are-not-yourself t1_iyf0ovf wrote
Regarding your edit concerning plagarism, I would direct you to the Wikipedia entry on attribution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_(copyright)
> a work in the public domain, which is any not covered by copyright, has no such attribution requirement... this is the distinguishing factor between plagiarism, which is not a crime, but an unethical act, and copyright infringement, which may be a cause of legal action from the author.
A comment obviously has no copyright attached to it, but it is still a work in the public domain, and claiming it as one's own is the clinical definition of plagarism.
Edit: Also this is clearly not a parody of the comment, it's a direct rip of the comment.
Halvus_I t1_iyf1dop wrote
Im going to be frank with you, i have very dim view of current ip law, copyright in particular, so I am generally unsympathetic to those that leverage these systems. Its a whole lot of concern over very first world problems. We would be more artful if we abolished copyright altogether, given our current technological point in time.
you-are-not-yourself t1_iyf1ypu wrote
Thanks for that. I'm of the view that copyright systems, and many other legal systems, imperfectly reflect morality and people should try to follow the ethical spirit of these systems even in situations where they're absent. But your perspective is definitely a valid lens as well.
Ghimzzo OP t1_iye1wmm wrote
Haha last post was a shit title. And Kill Bill is obv what Im referencing, so its not like you gave me the idea.
shadesofwolves t1_iye2djy wrote
I mean, they commented it, you deleted the post, then reposted it with this... Sure seems like they did.
Ghimzzo OP t1_iye31w6 wrote
True
shadesofwolves t1_iye34kv wrote
So they did...?
Ghimzzo OP t1_iye37ni wrote
No. Not that it matters though.
shadesofwolves t1_iye3mnv wrote
Clearly it did to them, and you if it was true.
Blocked for a simple observation, alright then. Maybe it was true 🤷♂️
Cheet0h-Cheese t1_iye8joc wrote
Never cross a man and his NEED for karma
roth_dog t1_iyeymwt wrote
She can do anything.
IFuckPeanutButter_69 t1_iyf2cmv wrote
For the right price
deineMomIstFett t1_iyepg7j wrote
Oh boy can't wait for the r34
Manafaj t1_iyel6g7 wrote
Is Mario getting a fighting game?
Crash4654 t1_iyezcg6 wrote
Smash bros
Stoned-hippie t1_iyeshcv wrote
Not in a million years, Nintendo would never show his character with such violence
MaleficentPi t1_iye1f8h wrote
Jesus fucking Christ, I make a Kill Bill v1 comment and you suddenly decide to rebrand for the likes? Saaaaad