Registered: Feb 02, 2009
Total Posts: 9415
Country: United States
I'm good with the "right-ing" part, even in the form of publicity ... as long as it is agreeable to the "wronged" party. I've made "lemonade outa lemons" many a time.
My beef is with people who aspire to dismiss the "wronged" part of it by claiming the "publicity" as being justification of a greater value than the wrong committed ... thereby perpetuating the mythical notion that already plagues the industry that "credit given" makes it alright to take what isn't yours.
My point at emphasis on the "wronged" part is that many times people (especially good natured ones) won't "rock the boat" thinking that they are being "greedy" over something "petty". But the fact of the matter is that someone stole from you. Yes, it is totally your call at whether to "forget", "forgive & forget", "forgive & not forget" or make an effort @ amending it such that the wrong has been righted (infinitely variable).
Granted, equating a "blogger" to a "thief" might seem over-the-top to some, but however you want to label them, the "offending party" wronged the rightful owner ... whether by intent of deceit (hoping nothing would be noticed or said) or "innocence" of ignorance (not understanding how the wrong was being committed) ... the wrong was still committed and "credit given" doesn't change that.
Again, if the rightful owner of the image is agreeable to a Billion dollars, a cup-o-joe or total anonymity ... no worries, his call. The part that bothers me is when people go around saying that the owner "should be happy" he got credit for his stolen work ... despite the fact that he was never even given the opportunity to be part of the "transaction" and usage determination of his rightful property in the first place.
If someone IS truly happy that another took their work without asking because of the "publicity" ... send them flowers, a thank you note and make a donation to their cause, take them out to lunch, wash their car, walk their dog, put their kids through college, etc. (infinitely variable) to express your gratitude. But, I don't find telling someone else who is NOT happy (OP was not happy) about being wronged that they SHOULD be happy just because they got credit appropriate ... trying to suggest that propriety of giving credit overrides the impropriety of the theft.
Kinda like shoplifting a steak and claiming that because you paid for the potato (after you got caught) ... so it's all good, right?. Just because the blogger did "one thing right" by giving credit (paying for the potato), does not exonerate or mitigate the fact that he still took another's work without permission and used it without right to do so.
Wrong is wrong ... and the OP was wronged.