A quote from another post.
"Copying others' work and making 'improvements'. One should always ask first for two main reasons: copyright, if we ignore it here, is devalued everywhere; not to ask first smacks of an unpleasant arrogance."
Just because you're a highly respected member here, should not allow you to disregard your own comments and ignore the fact that Cjogo's image is now no longer even close to original and probably not authorised by the OP. But this is the "User Critiques" forum so anything goes?
This is incorrect as far as the copyright laws of both the U.S. and Canada are concerned.
Under U.S. copyright law, using someone's image, with appropriate attribution, in the context of a critique is perfectly legal, as outlined in section 107 covering fair use:
"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."
LuLa, of course, is based in Canada, and is therefore subject to their laws. Canada doesn't have what we here in the U.S. call "fair use". They operate under a concept called "fair dealing". And while it is more strict than its U.S. counterpart, using copyrighted works in the context of a critique is permitted as long as attribution is clearly stated. This is covered in section 29 of the Canadian Copyright Law:
"s.29.1 Fair dealing for the purpose of criticism or review does not infringe copyright if the following are mentioned:
(a) the source; and
(b) if given in the source, the name of the
(i) author, in the case of a work,
(ii) performer, in the case of a performer’s performance,
(iii) maker, in the case of a sound recording, or
(iv) broadcaster, in the case of a communication signal."