Adama
Some good points but a counter point to consider.
Whether it’s a photo used without permission by a big company or people using your work without attribution there does tend to be a dismissive attitude overall (not that that is the case here)
I can see how somebody could come into this situation with that as the background and just cut right to the chase.
There wasn’t a “cease and desist” (the legal equivalent of an ahem) nor a DMCA copyright takedown (harsher but less financial damaging than a copyright suit with damages)
Their tone was scolding but it was a “hey… heads up… you gotta fix this” without resorting to any of the above.
Ernest took it with the right attitude and Emma accepted it and that’s that.
Couldn’t really ask for a better outcome and Emma has every right to come out swinging harder than she did.
I can’t speak to her experience with this but personally it is sometimes better to be firm (but fair) at the outset so people don’t ignore a softer tone requiring you to escalate it.
That’s just bad for everybody all around.
And instead of making it closed they made it available under open source licensing. With the only terms being attribution.
They’re not the bad guy here. Nor is Ernest. There’s no bad guys here just a mistake, a call to fix it, a fix and an acceptance of that fix.
Really Ernest showed the perfect example of “if you have to eat crow eat it while it’s young and tender”
Or help if you get the ambiguity out of the way up front. So later when somebody says “hey… I’m going to use your art to sell this multi-million dollar product” or to advertise some unsavory service you’d rather not have your stuff asssociated with there’s clarity on what they could and couldn’t do. And it makes any recourse (if it requires going the legal route) easier.
Like a dentist, always cheaper and better to go with their advice in order to prevent more costly issues down the road.
Not sure about the license, etc so check the sites repo but here’s the icon svg the site is using
