"In this case, the person posting it and 
claiming 
it to be theirs can really rip an honest and 
unsuspecting person off....Does it really 
matter? What does the purity of 
her train of thought when she bought the cel 
really have anything to do with this?"

I was under the impression that the discussion 
whas about her being hurt/damaged through the 
persons illegetimate actions. What the image is 
used for has no reprecutions on her. Assuming 
the image was used only by some person who wants 
to show off they have it, hence putting aside 
the whole "riping off others" issue. Would you 
then also care? And if so why? You have the 
original and you know its yours, so why be 
bothered what other people think, which directy 
ties in with why she is collectiong her cels.
As far as the VanGogh issue, I assure you they 
wouldnt care at all. They are no legal 
repercutions for the owners of the real 
painting, so why would they bother to "hunt" 
down every person claming to have the painting. 
As an example think of all the reproduction 
painting of VanGoghs Sunflowers you can buy from 
any art student wanting to make a few extra 
bucks, do the owners of the real Sunflowers seek 
those people out and prosecute them? Or do you 
reckon every single one of those art students 
writes the respective owners and asks for 
permission?
Anyway it seems like the issue has been resolved 
in the post below this one. I side with the fan 
cel artist on this issue. Im not saying that 
what the other person was doing was right and do 
not condone it, but I dont think such a huge 
fuss should be kicked up over it by the original 
owner, that is all I was trying to convey.