In reply to ThePolyBlog.

What about fair use? Entirely legal with proper credits. Permission is nice, but not required.

Also, like it or not, there are political and corporate interests that corrupt the fair administration of justice and rule enforcement. viz., copyright, trademark and patent.

Judges are human and corruptible despite what the justice system in which they sit may say. They, like everyone in office, have their own political agendas, viz., Chief Buffoon John Roberts (only surpassed in stupidity by the idiot who proffered him). Ditto any rulemaking body.

People today have no ethics, no moral conscious and a poor sense of fairness. If they are hurt, it is a "criminal offense"; when the pain is external, "who cares?" A higher authority will get the final judgment.

Misuse in no way puts the responsibility on the maker of goods. Such is the assinine example of giving a loaded gun to children. The passer assumes full risk and liability. Control is beyond the manufacturer (and the purveyor). Caution: prosecutors can't follow this simple logic.

Whenever the government is involved, the system is corrupt, the results are skewed, and, at least for the US fed.gov, failure is absolutely guaranteed--no matter which outcome you are seeking.

If you create and you show your creation, expect to be imitated, copied, cloned and slighted. It is the nature humans, not merely a Word Press plugin problem. In the end, chances are someone already thought of it or did it. The credit will go to the one who gets recognized and notarized. e.g., Edison, who didn't invent the electric light bulb. Columbus is another also-ran.

A truly creative person doesn't worry about theft; most of what he does is above and beyond. Doubtful he is concerned with the drivel here. Fawners always cry to the authorities, even when they deserve nothing. ©2015