[robertpateii]

I'd say the truth is somewhere in between. Closer to a comedian using another comedian's joke.

[scotty79]

Is that because even though the show is free performer gets 2% of the popcorn viewers choose to buy?

Original authors of the jokes either don't earn any money with them or do it similar way that the "joke thief" does. Only they are not that popular as he is.

I think reposting is much less of an offence then one proffessional comediant using joke of another one without proper attribution.

[sesqu]

"Stealing" jokes is very much frowned upon, but at least in performing arts, much relies on delivery. The same is not true for static arts, where poor attribution ranges from forgery to plagiarism.

[scotty79]

IFLS delivery is unique for this content.

[sesqu]

That's true, but it's not as significant a difference as interpretative art. The original still dominates.

Good point, though. Delivery of embedded content is often ignored.

[scotty79]

Significant enough to be considered valuable by millions of viewers.

[sesqu]

I don't think we're using the same words to mean the same things.