"Here, do this. Spend countless hours creating a perfect palette. Consider how to optimize it with a limiting 16 color constraint. Make sure you consider technical color theory and how you might use each shade. I'm not happy until you can justify why you chose every color. When you've got it done, lemme know, I'm going to steal it and use it for all my work thereafter, and not even mention you, so others assume I made it, which is the implication if I don't assign credit to someone else for the palette."
By all means, go right ahead. I would love to see what awesome results you come up with!
"Nobody owns any singular feature."
Exactly!
"Its the combination of many features that make an original composition which should be accredited."
Isn't that the work of the artist that is the result of the original composition? Let's take a look at Jad's avatar for a sec. People loved it so much that they made their own jadatar. Everyone knows that they used his same methods to an extent. So he's thusly accredited. Now, let's do this. Someone downloads his avatar, swaps the colors around, comes up and starts talking about that the avatar he has is his own piece of work. Which it isn't. Would he be punished for such insulence? Yes. Blatant composition ripping is not allowed. The sprite, or work itself, is the end result.
Hyposthesis A: A carpenter makes a table. He sells table, and it sets in someone's house. The house is sold, owners move, table remains. New carpenter comes up, sees table in disrepair, thinks, I can make a bookcast out of that. He does so, cuts it up, makes bookcase sells it. And it sits in someones house. Etc...
Who made the original work here? The first carpenter of course. Should the second carpenter who came along and made something else with it give the original carpenter something in return? If no, why? Becuase the first carpenter already got his due off of it. If the answer is yes, then why? Should every carpenter that ever reworks with those set of boards be obliged to the original artist who created the original end result, a table?
"Indigo already said it - time and effort is spent on fine-tuning a palette. Therefore it is somewhat intellectual property of the creator. Giving credit is obviously a common courtesy."
Again, um what? You here are saying, that even if someone from the other side of the world, creates something that, conicidently, randomly uses the palette of another artist. He has never met artist, never seen his work, never had any contact etc. Makes something with those sets of colors. Posts it, then someone goes, nice palette taken from so and so. The new artist goes, um, what? I've never even heard of that guy. And before you say, it doesn't happen, let me say, yes it does. I've seen it a number of times on this board. No, I might not be able to post exact links, but I have seen cases in the earlier posts in which a new artist is chased off for independently discovering, and using a set of colors that people have atributed to one artist.
Hypothesis B: The united nations holds a contest to see what elementary school student can publish the best short story about space esploration. A deadline is given and students race around the clock come up with something. A student in chile' makes his paper, takes it to school. Unbeknowest to him, while it is sitting on his desk, someone takes a picture of it and sets it up on the web. The student fortunatly turns in his paper without being discriminated against. Next day, student B, in south africa, finishes paper. He has been working on it the whole time. Without any connection to the web, or other services at all. He turns it in, the teacher looks at it a good while. Hands it back to him and says, nice try, that's already been turned in. You do know what the punishment is for plagarism yes? The student goes, um, what? He then makes his case about independant discovery, with the different setting, characters, locations, vehicles, uniqueness, yadda yadda. And with the witness of his parents and freinds, etc, his paper is accepted.
The problem? Student B made the same point as Student A, yet, even though the stories and everything else was different, yet in some degree, similiar, Students B paper was called into question. In both cases, time, effort, energy, fine-tuning were used to create the same point. Yet the results of the entire composition was different. But since Student A was first, every student thereafter must give credit or else be called into question.
That is the reasoning that I have, I think. Whether or not is a resource belongs to someone forever, or are other people allowed to create something freely with the same resources without fear of retribution. If the original composition of the resources, (the table or the paper, the sprite, etc) is taken and claimed upon by someone else without giving credit, is wrong. If someone else however, uses the same set of resources and independently creates a different composition, then should credit be given to someone else who used the same set of resources, on an intirely different composition, be given credit? No.
Hypothesis C: An art school holds a contest to see which of it's students can produce the best work with limited colors. Everyone goes about their process of creation. Student A, a genuine smart mouth, creates a black and white painting. Although, he only does so by splattering white paint on a canvas, and drawing a thin, straight black line across the middle. He turns it in early, ignoring the groans and irritating looks of his peers. Student B, having read the rules already, goes away for a week to finish his peice. He comes back with a black and white painting of a marvelous scene. Student A however, is upset that he too, used black and white, but because he already used black and white, it is his method, and no one else can turn in the same thing. Student A eventually gets Student B banned because of the rules of the competition. He later fails the term, and ends up going to politics.
Was anybody right here? The only person I see being right here, is Student B.
@jad: perhaps those where a poor choice of last words. Though I have seen that before. Apologies if this is thread derailing. (need I post my age everytime I make a post?)
@arne: so you still own those set of colors? Even if someone else independently discovered them on there own and posted a work without ever even been/seen/heard of it before? So in every piece of pixel art ever made, you own those colors? And the artist has to give you credit for it?
