This post of Mikaela Garcia has been circulating twitter.
The netizen posted a photo of a shirt’s design was just allegedly taken from Shutterstock, an online stock photography provider.
Rough translation: Why does the print look blurred? The design was only from shutterstock?!
What do you think of this? Is it in any way violating a copyright/patented laws?
@Franzis Faustin Ignatius Weh?alam mo sino at anong garments company gumawa neto??Wow ikaw na may alam ng lahat,tsaka dun ka nanggaling di ba??kaya alam mo na maraming company ung humahawak ng TEE CULTURE,..Ako?di talaga nagdadrawing?Wow ah,pareng kiko 16 yrs old naging animator ako at marami akong na animate na anime tulad ng ONEPIECE,PRECURE,BIKURIMAN,DIGIMON SAVERS,POWERPUFF GIRL Z,NARUTO,tapos sasabihin mo ko na hindi talaga nagdadrawing??..bka ikaw yung “Artist” kuno na nagyayabang khit d talaga nagdadraw,kasi bano ka..kung gusto mo ng katibayan magpost ka ng video na ikaw mismo ngdadrawing..Twice na?are sure? bkit ung ONEPIECE BRAND ko nadamay na naman dito?Ako ang may hawak ng ONEPIECE BRAND dito sa Pilipinas…so alam mo naman ung ibigsabihin nun di ba??Paalala lang pareng Kiko,,wag kang masyadong magsabi at magmamarunong/magaling agad na di mo sinisigurado yung mga pinopost mo baka malaman ng company baka kasuhan ka pa nyan…rock n roll to the world nalang tayo nalang tayo..^_^
As far as i know stock services like shutterstock have different plans wherein the user can buy a standard license and an enhanced or extended license that allows them usually an infinite number to reproduce those images. Also there are options if what image size the user wants. As long as binayaran ng designer yung photo nothing’s wrong with it if it came from shutterstock, bigstock etc.