I was browsing a popular fractal site and found an image in another artist's gallery that is more than similar to one of mine... and has been posted much more recently than my particular image was... and since I made a few of my flames available to be used as "starter" flames for others. I'm quite happy for people to take my "starter" flames and make something new and cool from them - but this particular image hasn't even done that... looks like a slight blur and a slightly different gradient have been applied and nothing else. The image is virtually a carbon copy of my original - which is what drew my attention to it in the first place... Now... I'm sort of stuck between being flattered that this person loved my original so much that they decided to keep it virtually the same... and being somewhat outraged that if they have taken my original and called it their own with very little tweaking, that they could at least give some credit for the basis of that flame. Right now I'm erring on the side of caution and optimism here - and am deciding to be pretty darned flattered... but I'm sure many of you can see the conundrum I'm facing here. What is really strange is that when one looks at all of the other flames in this person's gallery, they are so much more intricate than anything I've ever produced - in fact they are amazingly detailed and truly beautiful works of art. Another thing is that the name on the gallery doesn't match up to any names on the member list for that site that I can find - so I can't even ask that person in private whether they managed to generate that particular flame by some random event. I know with my version it took a hell of a lot of tweaking and scripts to get that flame to come out like it did... So what do you all think? Honest opinions happily accepted... lol! T.

My advice would be not to make too much of a deal of it. In my view, once you've posted something on the internet you lose most of the ownership. If you really don't want people to "take it" and calling it their own, then the only solution is to keep it on your harddrive and not let it out. I've had several instances where people have taken one of my pictures and used it as a background for their website, and it's not worth the touble to start a fuss. If not, I would suggest you keep feeling flattered. After all, it's better than being pissed off. :)

Haha! Good advice there mate... I think I'll take it... T.

I agree with kinggoran about once you post on the internet you lose most of the ownership. I think I would feel the same tdierikx, torn between being flattered and stunned that someone would take it in that manner. I was once asked by someone who commented on an image of mine, why don't I make them bigger so they can be used as a background, I told them that is precisely why I only do a smaller image (640x480). It's amazing how well it works. I keep the larger size on my computer in case I want to use it as a background for myself. Maybe this could work for you.

You know, I have had a fear of that but in reverse. I'm afraid that if I look at a lot of the posted images that some how in a subliminal way that I will render an image that looks too much like one that I have seen before. I hope that if I do that I don't make anyone angry. If I do, please let me know and I will be glad to remove it from the site. I do hope this never happens, but if it does, I mean no harm. Eventually it's bound to happen especially when people share back and forth. I am grateful for the sharing and do my best to change them as much as possible. Patti

I'm watermarking all of my newer images with a signature and date now... lol! I really don't mind if someone uses one of my images for a wallpaper - it's if they post it in their own gallery and call it theirs that I could be a bit worried... I run a general discussion site myself, and a few of my members there have been enjoying getting me to do custom sized wallpapers for them of my images - they aren't about to post them to a gallery though - not the arty type - more like an unruly pack actually... lol! Actually I don't think most of them would know what a fractal was if it bit them on the behind... haha! But when someone I don't know suddenly posts an image in their gallery that is so different to anything else they have in there - and it looks almost a carbon copy of one of my images - one could just be a little suspicious couldn't they? To be honest, that particular series that this person appears to have "borrowed" from, I don't think is my better stuff anyways... I've only been playing with Apophysis for about 5 weeks now and I reckon some of my newer stuff is much better... and I hope to continue in that vein... lol! Oh - and all of my stuff is generated from totally random batches in Apophysis that I tweak myself. I have a lot of other people's starter flames that I use for practising on - but I won't use any of those for the basis of one of my own works... I just wouldn't feel right about that... T.

"I'm watermarking all of my newer images with a signature and date now... lol!" I usually put the URL to my website in the corner, it's not so much a signature-thing, but rather a way for anyone who might have downloaded it to see where it came from, a ploy to get more visitors, maybe. :)
I've also wondered about Apophysis, I mean compared to other fractal generators it seems it cannot produce as many unique fractals, and there certainly are alot of them. It's only a matter of time before two people accidentally (or subconsciously (not simultaneously)) make two images similar enough to be mistaken as the same.

Message edited on: 03/12/2005 05:32

Just a little legal thing here, if someone has written something, or has posted their own work on the internet then legally it is their work and can claim copyright to it. It really is up to us all as individuals to honour this. The fact that other people do not honour copyright should not lead us all to say that once something is posted on the internet ownership is lost. Legal ownership still applies, though whether this can be enforced is another matter

Wasn't there a copyright Q&A not too long ago here on 'Rosity? Maybe if that was available (archived maybe?) it would help decide the issue of copyright in this instance? Just a thought.