> A digital video without any cut with all the credits at the end and beginning of the video and with the link to the source in the comments?!
Yes, reuploading someone else’s YouTube video is a shitty thing to do and a copyright violation.
> you make a screenshot of every Bored Apes and you use it as your avatar with the credits to the original owner, is a copyright violation? No, it’s how a digital product works.
No, that’s not how digital products work, and yes, it is a copyright violation. Giving credit doesn’t automatically grant you permission to use copyrighted material. Are you suggesting I can legally upload The Avengers to the internet in its entirety and it wouldn’t be a copyright violation as long as I leave the credits in? Or I can host an Adobe Photoshop binary as long as I give credit to Adobe?
You’re 100% in the wrong. Even Bored Apes has strict copyright licensing defined for their holders.
We have different point of view. I’m a photographer and when someone shows/links my photos on other sources, with the credits, I’m glad.
Anyway the web is full of mirrors of adobe apps.
It has been different if I had cut the video credits and didn’t linked to the source, but since I did, it’s not a copyright violation. It’s only someone that wouldn’t other people view it’s video outside of YouTube because he’s making money from YouTube. Now the result is that he lost all the traffic generates from the Reddit comments to his video.
And this is not the principles of free web and NFT in my opinion.
You’re 100% in the wrong. Even Bored Apes has strict copyright licensing defined for their holders.