Jon, I don't disagree with anything you are saying here at all, except that I think the word "stealing" isn't helpful. It is the lack of attribution that is the problem, and the lack of respect for the licence. What I take from what you're saying is that the copying per se isn't the problem - which is what I was trying to get at.

Where I disagree slightly is that you are concerned with how it was re-used and what for. Now Ricardo is clearly within his rights to object, because the image is copyright, but my wider point was that if you feel that re-use should in general be allowed that you can't pick and choose. It's a bit like free speech in that respect. You can say people should be respectful of the wishes of authors (within some vague bounds of "reasonableness") but I think being proscriptive in a legalistic way isn't helpful. This at core is the argument for the value of community norms versus precise licences - it is the spirit that is important not the letter.

We all agree that they did something bad, I am trying to figure out how to be precise about what it was that was bad about it, given that I generally beleive that re-use is a good thing. As you say, it crossed some sort of line - just trying to get clear in my head where that line is and why.