@jaguar.force/art-plagiarism-case-100-caso-de-plagio-artistico-100-chopiliart

On the home page of OCA, pinned at the top, always, is a post that says "OCA Rules", along with a condensed version on the right hand side. With the rules as easily accessible as that, I think it's reasonable that people are aware of them. In all the years I've been on Hive, I've never heard of any rule, but if it's understood now, we can just move forward with that understanding as the base, but I think there's still issues in the degree.

The latest post by Jaguar is a good example. I think it's a bit ridiculous to call this plagiarism as these two works hardly resemble each other at all. The example you used above about the artist not being able to get into a gallery is not remotely possible here. No one would confuse these two.

Also specificity is really important here. I would absolutely NOT say an artist needs to name their inspirations. That's very different from a reference.

This is referenced. I interpreted it in my own way, but ultimately, I painted this photo. There are no major changes in the subject matter or anything additional elements added other than my choices in HOW I choose to interpret it. Under the new rules in OCA, I would post a link to that photo.

Inspirations could include the color scheme, some of the compositional elements, the stylization, the mood, the list goes on, and that is a 1000% normal part of making art. I mentioned it somewhere else, but I'll say again. I think some of you might have a romantic notion of what it means to be an artist. But we're all constantly being inspired by each other and all taking little bits from each other. It's not something artists hide or are ashamed of or would ever need to be. It's literally what you learn in art school.

So were some elements taken from that original source? Yes. The pose, some ideas about the character, but a ton is different. There is no place where this would fly as plagiarism except here and that's harming the user experience.