I appreciate your efforts to educate me about plagiarism and copyright law, but I really have no trouble understanding the concepts. We could argue over and over again about plagiarism and intellectual property; I doubt that we will ever agree. For me, copyright law is an outdated concept; it only works in a world with a lot of centralized power. But there, we don't need to agree.

I don't like dishonesty. When I see an obvious case of someone trying to defraud others, it makes me sad and angry. So, in certain cases, I agree to remove the rewards. I have two requirements:

• Plagiarism should be obvious.
• The user must clearly be trying to misrepresent their work as 100% theirs.

You and @jaguar.force will never agree with me on the second point, as you both believe that references should always be credited. For me it is different. So instead of arguing, let's talk about the first point.

This case is not obvious to me. In fact, if I start with a bias in favor of the artist, rather than against them, I come to a completely different conclusion. As others have pointed out, this character is a well known character. It looks the same, has the same characteristics, wears the same clothes. Perhaps this pose is even a common pose for the character to stand in.

How can you be sure that this was copied, and not just an accidentally similar piece? If you can tell me that, I will listen to you. If you dodge the question or blame me for "not seeing the obvious," there is no discussion.