The supply of them is very low and people are hoarding what few are left for high prices.

Either way, you shouldn't care as duping really has no impact on a hat. Valve has said that they will never remove them and they have no difference than their original.

If it's a good deal and a hat you like, don't let something as dumb as that stop you from getting it.

Both of your arguments there have no basis though. You can't ask how I'd feel about this situation when you give an example you yourself admit have no similar circumstances. Frankly I wouldn't care really, as I wouldn't expect an image I didn't put a watermark on to be traced back to me for credit.

As for the second point, he only states that it was his piece and provides no actual proof. I could do the same with anything I find on Google like that. And before you think someone wouldn't do that, this is the internet.

Actually when looking at this case, there is zero indication at all of who took the image in the first place, commissioned or not. For all anyone knows, both people found it on Google images and one has declared credit for it on their page. The image has no indication of a name or watermark to give credit to anyone, and the request to take it down gave zero proof they actually made it, meaning I could do the same to one of many different trades. This is actually a choice I think the mod made a terrible judgement on.

Originally posted by Zemnmez:

Hm, I'm not so sure, I think the guy might get intellectual property over the concept, I'll have to look it up.

Easiest way to understand it would be if it were legal to sell the image in a replicated print. In this case, Valve could easily order a cease and desist order on this image because it was made using their program and has their character featured with nothing added that is original to the maker.

This is why the art world falls under a heavy gray area due to commissioned (drawn) art because of the vague borderlines of what constitutes a parody, satire, or plain fair use. If it were to be a photo of a guy dressed as the soldier with that hat and pose, then the creator would have full rights due to it being a new concept related to the soldier, but not the soldier himself.

In this case though, nothing of a new concept was created, the character, background, hat, effect and method of taking the screenshot is not native to the one who took the screenshot.

Originally posted by Ploppai! B. Trading Card Sets!:

I got his trade closed, next time its going to be a ban
Spoke to HelenAngel about it, she was quite accomodating about it.
I will upload the chatlog if she gives me the yes.
You AREN'T allowed to do this on outpost, not sure about on any other forums, but you get 1 warning then a ban I think.

That's honestly quite disappointing, he really had no reason to take it down at all, just taking a screenshot does not give you the right to tell others how it's used.

In this case, there really isn't anything that can be done.

Taking a screenshot in a video game that you do not own the rights to doesn't give you the right of intellectual property. Everything you do that has the likeness of characters created by Valve that was generated by the use of their program is theirs to control and deem appropriate to upload and monitor (to some extent, fair use and all that jazz).

In your inventory on your steam page, there will be an option to view inventory history. For me using the new beta, it is right above the tabs that you select games to view.

Sadly that's the main fix for that issue. Typically if time doesn't solve your issue, you'll just be asked to provide screenshot proof that you've made the trade with the donation bot.

Outpost.

Have you logged out and back in?

That seems to be the quickest fix. Otherwise I'd give it a little bit of time.