If you put something on the internet, it will get stolen

[Babydoll]

Ive never understood why people do that as surely you would want your own stuff to stand out and be different to everyone else! Cringe!

Babydoll~

[lostpony]

On a tangent here, eating photographic cake frosting just seems wrong to me, like somehow the colors must be toxic photography chemicals even though I know they're not.

I suspect whoever stole the image simply grabbed something off the internet for convenience without considering it is copyrighted material, or possibly even understanding that just because it's on the internet doesn't mean it's free.

Lots of people really just don't know.

[Baby Sugarberry]

Edible cake toppers are made with a special printer that uses food colouring, so they're safe... but even the best ones never look particularly good.  Any decent bakery can pull off a much nicer hand-decorated cake. 

[Dragonflitter]

We can't give people a free pass like that, lostpony. It's true a lot of people don't know about proper 'netiquette (as I call it). But that doesn't mean they should be excused when they take stuff. It should be common sense 1.) Did I make this picture myself? 2.) No? Then it's not my right to use it.

PS: Yeah, that's just food coloring. If you ever ate any colored food ever, you're safe, it's the same stuff.

[Carrehz]

On a tangent here, eating photographic cake frosting just seems wrong to me, like somehow the colors must be toxic photography chemicals even though I know they're not.

Oh thank god it's not just me I know there's nothing 'wrong' with it but it just doesn't feel right...

[lostpony]

There is such a thing as fair use too....if it's not marked as copyrighted, and the image is used for personal purposes such as on a cake to be eaten and not sold, it's not entirely clear to many people that the image can NOT be used.  Especially if it has already been separated from its source and handed around, which happens a lot particularly now that we have Internet.

If people only used intellectual property they created themselves, we'd never have achieved civilization....no stone tools, no spear-points, not even political satire.  Right or wrong, concluding you can't use it because you didn't make it simply wouldn't be practical.

If I wanted to have a cake printed for a party I might have done the same thing without thinking about it as a problem, and I know more than most people about what is and isn't OK under the law.  As to how the cake ended up on the Internet, that's another issue.

I'll put my longwinded opinions and tiresome pendantic legalese under a spoiler so as not to clutter up this thread.

Spoiler

Cease and Desist letters exist to put the unlicensed user on notice that they are in violation because copyright violation has an element of "intent".  If a person uses a copyrighted image (the wrongful act or "actus reus"), the crime of copyright violation is not complete until their intent to do so wrongfully (the "mens rea") can be established by, for example, refusing to desist when instructed to do so by the copyright holder, or by other means establishing their state of mind at the time such as boasting about their evil plan.  Only when there are both actus reus and mens rea is any crime complete, with very few exceptions called "strict liability crimes" that don't require intent such as dumping of toxic chemicals.  Even murder of course requires intent to be a crime.

My point is only that the person who used said image for a cake without permission is not necessarily guilty of copyright violation, not to give the person a "free pass".

Meanwhile, that site seems pretty mean about making fun of things and jumping to conclusions, for example the "sexism" they claim to see in the two separate images that show a guy with his feet on the desk and a woman working at a computer.  I don't see it as sexist without jumping to unsupported conclusions, like their assumption that the guy is the boss...if one assumes the images are related to each other, it could just as likely be the woman is the entrepreneur and the guy is waiting to talk to her, or he's just casual and lazy while she's hardworking...my conclusion is that the images are simply unrelated and mean nothing.  To me, it seems to be the website that is unlawfully re-publishing the copyrighted work and stating it's a "wreck", with enough sophistication to know it's not fair use. 

I'm not sure I see how that cake is a "wreck" and perhaps the rightful owner might send them a C&D and get it removed from their site if they don't like it.  As to the person who used the image without permission in the first place, I think it's been eaten.

I gather this is a well-known image here?  I don't know it before this but I like it and I think it makes a really cute cake.  I'm sorry it was used without permission and unhappy it's being called a "wreck", but I'm happy to get to see it and, I thank whoever created the image.  Those pirates should at least have saved you a piece.

[ponycake]

People used to sell his stuff on keychains, magnets, etc., all the time on Ebay. They probably still do.

The cake COULD be cute if not for all the clashing horror around it. LOL

[lostpony]

but it's piiiiiiiiink......

or is that "salmon".  As long as it's not salmon flavored.

[reanna-mator]

Been there. I've had people take credit for my anime music videos before. Yeah, people seem to think they have free reign over everything they find online. :/

[ponycake]

but it's piiiiiiiiink......

or is that "salmon".  As long as it's not salmon flavored.

salmon

[Dragonflitter]

There is such a thing as fair use too.... <snip>

But there is a difference between "an image" and "art." Not every image is art. Not every image means something to the person who made it. This is art. It's not okay to take art and use it for your own use. It would be one thing if this was a picture from the Hasbro website. Yes, that falls under fair use. Not only that, but the people who make the images readily expect them to be used in advertising and to spread awareness of the product. But the person who made this fanart did NOT. They did not make the image with the intent for it to be used by anyone. Just because someone shares their art online does not make "oh it's free for people to use, because they don't know any better." Telling an artist "You should expect it because that's the way the internet is and people don't know any better" doesn't solve the issue of art theft.

I'm really tired of people who claim "Oh I didn't know any better!" when they get called on the fact that they steal fanart. That's a thief's first excuse when they get caught in the act. Not only is it a lie most of the time, but not bothering to think about it beforehand doesn't make it okay.

Your argument about the existence of the website itself and whether you agree with their opinions on what is or is not 'sexist' is not the point of this thread. This thread was not made to talk about whether CakeWrecks.com are correct in their beliefs or not. The point was to show that fanart can be taken from the internet and used without permission.

[Wardah]

I think there's a world of difference between a company mass producing something using a stolen image (which is a commercial use) and someone submitting an image they found online to a cake decorator to have it put on a birthday cake (which is a personal use imho).

[lostpony]

Um, wow Dragonflitter.  I apologize.  I misread how serious you were about this issue and I should have kept my response a bit more focused to be more clear.  I'm sorry.

I agree with you:  it is NOT OK to steal art, and I did not say it was OK. 

But it's not OK to steal Hasbro's art either, even though it's less harmful.  It's not fair use just because they're big and can take it.  Fair use is for satire or education, etc.; here is a complete definition that comes right up on Google:  "the doctrine that brief excerpts of copyright material may, under certain circumstances, be quoted verbatim for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching, and research, without the need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder"

While I personally feel it's harmless to use a copyrighted image without permission privately (on a cake to be eaten privately or for private viewing etc), it's not protected under Fair Use or any other doctrine but is in fact copyright violation if done knowingly and willfully.  Anyone who watches movies on tape or DVD has been repeatedly admonished as to this clear international law, though many of us don't know what Fair Use actually means, or often whether an image we see on the Internet is copyrighted or not.

My point was that it's easy to inadvertently use something if it's not clear that it is copyrighted, and that's a much easier mistake to make once it's been wrongfully copied at least once.  Being on such a website with no language identifying it as protected exposes the subject image further to such inadvertent re-use.

I don't think it's fair to accuse most people who say they didn't know, of being thieves and liars.  Yes, some people are thieves and liars, but many are just trying to get a cake made for a child's party or make a card for a friend, or share an image they think is good.

At any rate, I agree with your stated point, Dragonflitter:  copyrighted material definitely gets around the Internet without permission.  Although in this particular case, it also got eaten in the real world.

[Hannah66665]

For the longest time, Netflix used someone's artwork from deviantart for the animated Mario series.

Anyway, about the cake... my guess is whoever chose the image thought it was hasbro art... because honestly when I first saw it I thought it was too? I'm not familiar with the artist that's been mentioned... but I think I must have seen a lot of their work and thought it was official gen 1 artwork.

One of my brothers actually once said that once you put something on the internet, you no longer own it and it's free for everyone to use it for whatever they want...  at the time the subject was about people stealing youtube videos and editing them into their own videos... ugh... it's never come up again but I really hope if he ever says it again my other brother who has created content on youtube is there to put him in his place because it's ridiculous...

[ponycake]

Not sure if it's been mentioned the artist is Marco Albiero, who is a professional artist, but just did MLP stuff as hobby art. He's great! His website has a lot of beautiful work.

http://marcoalbiero.altervista.org/gallery/fan-arts/my-little-pony/

He's on instagram now too I see.