I would have to disagree with you, though primarily I did this piece for my own soul and submitted it primarily for criticism purposes. It is clearly stated that this piece cannot be used for commercial purposes. (I've provided the link)
If you would like I can quote a piece of Fair Use doctrine:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
- the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
- the nature of the copyrighted work;
- the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
- the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of Fair Use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Briefly, these indicate that 1. The use must not attempt to "supersede the objects" of the original but rather be educational or critical. 2. The less of the original that is used in relation to the whole the more likely that use is fair, though the importance of the specific portion is also considered (as quoting the most important part may attempt to "supersede" the original). 3. The use must not infringe on the copyright owner's ability to exploit his original work (for instance, by acting as a direct market substitute for the original work), though not through criticism or parody.
It is highly unlikely that I've made some of the image copyright holders lose money by doing this piece. If Crestock wanted to use the image I created publicly and distribute it to make monetary gains, then it would be a different story.
Second, I did use 2 images from the Crestock terms. One is the desert and the other one is the camera. Look closely. The desert is actually in the middle of the piece, the central part, and gives it the overall tone.
Nowhere in Rules on this site does it specifically limit how to create pieces of art. It's an excersize in creative and technical skills if anything.
Nor do the rules say that you can't modify the given images to your liking. Actually it encourages you to experiment, be creative.
You have the right to your own opinion of course, and if Crestock management agrees with you, they are welcome to take the piece down.
Cheers.
Posted: 18. Dec 2006 by nfinity