Ok, so I'm not going to be nice
Mods, I'm sorry to bring this here but I strongly feel it's the right thing to do.
thalassa_ipx has just posted to promote her own community, which in most cases is wonderful. However, this girl has recently been removed from at least 2, and possibly other communities for graphics theft. She's taking copyrighted and/or paid dolls and editing them into her blinkies without even so much as credit to the original doll maker.
Need proof?
Thalassa's blinkie on her own photobucket account
the original doll in a deviant art gallery
a base that's not allowed to be redistributed in any way
a doll made from that base, turned into a blinkie, and in Thalassa's photobucket
made from a base from DHF who doesn't allow bases to be redistributed also in Thalassa's photobucket. It's also in the paid requests gallery linked below.
Here is DHF's terms of use and a quote directly from that page
"You may not provide the edited base on your website, nor may you redistribute it in any way without permission."
Since the owner of that site is one who brought the theft to my and other community owners attention, I think it's safe to say she never gave permission.
Nene Thomas art which is for use only with permission and never to be used for profit. You'll find it here in Thalassa's paid requests gallery.
There are several more examples but I think this pretty much gets the point across. If you join her community and request her things, you're likely to get into trouble right along with her, whether you know about the theft or not. Some of these original artists are looking into bringing legal action against Thalassa for the theft, because she's been told, been asked, been shown and still continues to steal other peoples work.
thalassa_ipx has just posted to promote her own community, which in most cases is wonderful. However, this girl has recently been removed from at least 2, and possibly other communities for graphics theft. She's taking copyrighted and/or paid dolls and editing them into her blinkies without even so much as credit to the original doll maker.
Need proof?
Thalassa's blinkie on her own photobucket account
the original doll in a deviant art gallery
a base that's not allowed to be redistributed in any way
a doll made from that base, turned into a blinkie, and in Thalassa's photobucket
made from a base from DHF who doesn't allow bases to be redistributed also in Thalassa's photobucket. It's also in the paid requests gallery linked below.
Here is DHF's terms of use and a quote directly from that page
"You may not provide the edited base on your website, nor may you redistribute it in any way without permission."
Since the owner of that site is one who brought the theft to my and other community owners attention, I think it's safe to say she never gave permission.
Nene Thomas art which is for use only with permission and never to be used for profit. You'll find it here in Thalassa's paid requests gallery.
There are several more examples but I think this pretty much gets the point across. If you join her community and request her things, you're likely to get into trouble right along with her, whether you know about the theft or not. Some of these original artists are looking into bringing legal action against Thalassa for the theft, because she's been told, been asked, been shown and still continues to steal other peoples work.