this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2026
223 points (97.4% liked)

Comic Strips

23055 readers
2762 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As the title.

Should there be a new rule added where intentional removal of credits and watermarks from other peoples works be deleted?

Only thing i can think against it is if the original artist isn't known. Usually someone in the comments finds it though

top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 21 hours ago

Yes, absolutely.

I have strong opinions on the matter

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 72 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] Lemvi@lemmy.sdf.org 51 points 1 day ago (2 children)

and OP didn't credit it 👀

[–] abominable_panda@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago

Ha I hadnt even noticed! I saw so many uncredited posts recently I didnt think it was already discussed. Obviously didn't bother searching either. My mistake xD

Tbf I didnt even post this for credit. I just wanted to kickstart a discussion but looks like its already got traction on the other post so im happy

[–] notabot@piefed.social 11 points 1 day ago

This has got to be peak irony.

[–] TheV2@programming.dev 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yikes! I caught myself making the assumption that this was an "official" mod's post in response to the existing discussion...

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago

From what I understand there's only one mod here, and they have been MIA for awhile. It's unlikely we are going to see an official mod response.

[–] arin@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago

Imo anyone caught removing credits should get banned

[–] AcesFullOfKings@feddit.uk 47 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This community is effectively unmoderated. There's a single mod who is no longer active. So good luck asking for changes lol

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

He was active a few weeks ago. Maybe he is on vacation or something. Relax.

[–] Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My Cincinnati instance has like 5 mods and maybe 4 active users

[–] Ruthalas@infosec.pub 11 points 1 day ago

Clearly the mods all vacation in Cincinnati.

[–] JetpackJackson@feddit.org 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Is there another community that is moderated? I would step up but I'm definitely not the person to ask

[–] viral.vegabond@piefed.social 27 points 1 day ago

Yes, absolutely.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes. Unfortunately, proving intentionality in smaller cases than beep may be difficult. But it's useful as something to lean back on when it's obvious/egregious like their case.

First step would be enforcing the existing rules lime two posts per day per user, imo.

[–] SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Just say that if it doesn’t have a watermark the poster has to provide a link to the original.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago

That's perfectly logical, and I agree entirely.

The issue lies in the problem user OP is trying to address with this rule. Beep has stated that they won't consistently attribute sources until the community implements the rule they want enforcing that users strip attribution out of the image itself: https://lemmus.org/comment/17161116

Hooray dumb internet drama!

[–] deliriousdreams@fedia.io 12 points 1 day ago

I think that deliberately removing credits should be against the rules but if they try to link back to the artist to give attribution in the event that the comic has already had attribution removed I would be okay with that so long as the rest of the work is intact. The individual who's been shown to be using AI to remove watermarks and artist signatures really ought to receive a suspension or something both for their ridiculous post rate (far exceeding the new rule about 2 posts per day), and also because they admit to removing attibution on purpose.

[–] Windex007@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I actually think it's morally correct to strip stone toss or Scott Adam's names from thier works.

[–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

I don't think it's morally correct to remove their names. People have the right to know who the artist is.

There's the old question, can you separate the art from the artist? Everyone is going to have a different opinion, and for those that say no; sharing a comic without saying who it's from doesn't allow them to decide "that's a Scott Adams comic, fuck that guy".

Or just don't post them to begin with

[–] c0dezer0@programming.dev 3 points 1 day ago

You should look up the credit first. Has the credit similiar works? Then leave the credit untouched.

If there are no results, then someone else might be trying to "steal" the works and want to sell as their own.

Only in verified cases you should remove the incorrect credits and add the correct ones.