It seemed to bug people that Schmid referred to the Flickr photos he was appropriating as not having attained a certain threshold of originality, as if he was asserting himself as an aristocrat who had the right to do with the work of nameless, faceless peasants as he saw fit.
Richard Prince and Andy Warhol, on the other hand, appropriated the work of large corporations and big advertising, attacking them, maybe, or at least being perceived as doing so.
Warhol and Prince appear as Robin Hood, then, where Schmid appears as the Sheriff of Nottingham. Schmid's got this arrogance about him that rankles people here.
I'm not completely sure he isn't doing the same thing they're doing, though. He's using a certain kind of photograph that's becoming ubiquitous, the Flickr photo, in order to make a comment about contemporary life.
The threshold of originality statement from him is an interesting challenge. It's an act of war. He is fairly unequivocally stating his intellectual and artistic superiority to certain people, maybe many of us on this thread. He's saying within a certain moral order he outranks others. He's saying if you don't come up with something original and strong enough to stand its ground according to a threshold of originality test he's got the right, based on intellectual or artistic might, to eat you up and make you his vassal. If you can't stand your own ground artistically, you've got to run to a judge and hope he'll defend you.