"Inventor of image only made popular by people widely copying and remixing it starts suing people over it now that it's popular."<p>I half expected the post date to be April 1 (it wasn't), or for the last line of the article to be "And if you believed a word of the above, here's an image for you:" (it wasn't).
Why so much hate when an artist enforces his own copyright on an image, but only against companies or individuals profiting from it?<p>It seems pretty darn similar to when a company is sued for GPL infringement, but no one cares about the little projects that gain no traction that are probably in technical violation of the license.
So trollface author became actual copyright troll himself clipping coupons of people who use it, but without reimbursing millions of people who made the trollface what it is today, a recognizable sign.
Hmm... maybe someone should tip off the Pepe frog creator.<p>Someone is flat-out selling remixes of that meme. (hopefully just as a joke)<p><a href="http://normi.es/getout/" rel="nofollow">http://normi.es/getout/</a>
the trollface originates from the "problem, officer?" comic, not the one referenced in the article. i don't think this guy is the original creator.
The guy posted it in 4chan, an anonymous image board. Shouldn't that make it public domain? If he copyrighted it after that, shouldn't people be able to use the version of the image they got before the copyright?<p>Also, 4chan doesn't keep archives, how do we know he's the original author anyway?