07/11/2007 11:59:10

Did you drop out of school at 1st grade and never learn good grammar?

07/11/2007 06:24:31

The site's policy of requiring a DMCA notice to have copyrighted material is insufficient. Submitting a DMCA notice and waiting for it to be processed takes time and money. Furthermore, the original artists can be difficult to contact and might not be aware of the copyright infringement and may not have sufficient proof that they are the copyright holder (source files deleted, etc.)

07/11/2007 06:18:27

In addition, even using uncaptioned cat pictures you find in Google without express permission of the ORIGINAL author amounts to copyright infringement. So unless you take all the photos yourself or use images in the public domain, you are breaking laws.

07/11/2007 06:06:53

Well, it looks like headcat deleted my comment explaining why this was happening. In case you didn't read it, I'll explain again: In most civilized countries, copyright law exists to protect intellectual property, giving the creator of the content exclusive rights to distribute (or license/allow the distribution of) the copyrighted media. Why does this matter? Many pf the images on this site were created by members of image boards. They took the time to take the photos and think of the captions. Not only do sites like these copy the artists' works without permission, but also PROFIT (through advertisements) off the stolen art. Contrary to many widespread beliefs, finding an image on the Internet does not mean you can use it however you want. Imagine if somebody started making illegal copies of an artists painting and started selling them. This is no different. Headcat has ignored any attempts to discuss the stolen images. Thus, we have to use alternative ways to get his attention.

07/11/2007 01:51:52

Well, thanks for sticking around!! I've just turned on administrative image approval, so hopefully it won't be such a problem from now on.