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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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!