Rip sites
seeing we tend to be on the subject lately
Sunday, July 8, 2007 by SKoriginals | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
I have found yet another site that not only has skin rips but also programs as well like Rumshot... go figure right
http://computer-arts.info/index.php
this particular user seems to be big on posting things
http://computer-arts.info/user/UlyssesD/
I have seen windowblinds, wallpapers, icons, cursor, ect on this site... sometimes the original authors name is included, sometimes its not.. also, sometimes there is a link to the original download and sometimes not.
Check it out yourself and you decide what you would like to do.
I have no clue how to contact anyone directly related to the site itself, maybe someone else can?
http://computer-arts.info/index.php
this particular user seems to be big on posting things
http://computer-arts.info/user/UlyssesD/
I have seen windowblinds, wallpapers, icons, cursor, ect on this site... sometimes the original authors name is included, sometimes its not.. also, sometimes there is a link to the original download and sometimes not.
Check it out yourself and you decide what you would like to do.
I have no clue how to contact anyone directly related to the site itself, maybe someone else can?
 |
|
Page 1 of 2 | |
|
|---|
jazzymjr
Reply #2 Sunday, July 8, 2007 2:49 PM
Reply #2 Sunday, July 8, 2007 2:49 PM
I can't believe the nerve of that site. They got one of my blinds too. I emailed that person to remove my blind. There is a feedback button on the left side under the nav menu. It gives you the email address of that person (name escapes me, but he is the one that is claiming to be the auther of these blinds...H something or other.)
Some of the author's windowblinds I recognized are Z71, lypnjta, Bushman, JJ Ying, navigatsio, MikeB314, basj, Josephs, Night Train, Boxxi, danilloc, and Butch 123. I didn't check the other galleries.
Maybe one of the mods know of a better way to get a hold of the person responsible for this.
Some of the author's windowblinds I recognized are Z71, lypnjta, Bushman, JJ Ying, navigatsio, MikeB314, basj, Josephs, Night Train, Boxxi, danilloc, and Butch 123. I didn't check the other galleries.
Maybe one of the mods know of a better way to get a hold of the person responsible for this.
ArileenDesign
Reply #3 Sunday, July 8, 2007 2:56 PM
Reply #3 Sunday, July 8, 2007 2:56 PM
OK so it's the owner it seems
there is his answer:
"I reading this post now and i want to say that our site dont rip works. We give a free promotion and ad's to the authors and they must to thank us.
You can visit us and see by yourself "
there is his answer:
"I reading this post now and i want to say that our site dont rip works. We give a free promotion and ad's to the authors and they must to thank us.
You can visit us and see by yourself "
jazzymjr
Reply #4 Sunday, July 8, 2007 3:16 PM
Reply #4 Sunday, July 8, 2007 3:16 PM
I just got a reply from him:
Hello jazzymjr,
i don't understand why should i ask you for a permission if i link to your
work on deviantart???
This is your work here
http://computer-arts.info/2006/12/24/dockside_windowblinds_theme.html
Of course I would remove your work from my site, but I didn't hosting your
files anyway. So please be so kind and explain what I did wrong.
Amd, here is my response:
That windowblind is copyrighted to me, and therefore, I am the only one who has the right to decide where my blind is seen. It's doesn't matter that you are just "linking" to it, you do not have my permission to do that. And, another thing, you have yourself listed as the "author" of the blind underneath it, despite you listing me as the author in the title. This is called "ripping" and is illegal. Please remove my blind.
I can't believe his nerve!!!!
Hello jazzymjr,
i don't understand why should i ask you for a permission if i link to your
work on deviantart???
This is your work here
http://computer-arts.info/2006/12/24/dockside_windowblinds_theme.html
Of course I would remove your work from my site, but I didn't hosting your
files anyway. So please be so kind and explain what I did wrong.
Amd, here is my response:
That windowblind is copyrighted to me, and therefore, I am the only one who has the right to decide where my blind is seen. It's doesn't matter that you are just "linking" to it, you do not have my permission to do that. And, another thing, you have yourself listed as the "author" of the blind underneath it, despite you listing me as the author in the title. This is called "ripping" and is illegal. Please remove my blind.
I can't believe his nerve!!!!
WebGizmos
Reply #5 Sunday, July 8, 2007 3:52 PM
Reply #5 Sunday, July 8, 2007 3:52 PM
Looks like the Russian site starting all over under another name.
dj.hmelnitzki
Reply #6 Sunday, July 8, 2007 3:55 PM
Reply #6 Sunday, July 8, 2007 3:55 PM
Well i'm the owner of computer-arts.info, so if any of authors think me or my friends have "ripped" your work please contact me and it would be removed immediately. Our goal wasn't to rip but promote some work, well and also be promoted 
Whith regards
DJ.Hmelnitzki
Whith regards
DJ.Hmelnitzki
SKoriginals
Reply #7 Monday, July 9, 2007 10:08 AM
You are in violation of copyright infringement in accordance with the International Copyright Law.
Each unlawful download of an authors property without their consent is each a singular and separate breach of the International Copyright Law as determined under the Berne Convention of 1886.
"The Berne Convention requires its signatories to recognize the copyright of works of authors from other signatory countries (known as members of the Berne Union) in the same way it recognizes the copyright of its own nationals, which means that, for instance, Russian copyright law applies to anything published or performed in Russia, regardless of where it was originally created."
Some of the material you have on your site does not even have the original authors name or even a link back to the original download. Even if both of these things are in place you are still in violation as none of these authors provided you with permission to post these works.
If you would like these works to be posted on your site in the future contact the author(s) and respectfully ask them to post it.
Reply #7 Monday, July 9, 2007 10:08 AM
Well i'm the owner of computer-arts.info, so if any of authors think me or my friends have "ripped" your work please contact me and it would be removed immediately. Our goal wasn't to rip but promote some work, well and also be promoted.
You are in violation of copyright infringement in accordance with the International Copyright Law.
Each unlawful download of an authors property without their consent is each a singular and separate breach of the International Copyright Law as determined under the Berne Convention of 1886.
"The Berne Convention requires its signatories to recognize the copyright of works of authors from other signatory countries (known as members of the Berne Union) in the same way it recognizes the copyright of its own nationals, which means that, for instance, Russian copyright law applies to anything published or performed in Russia, regardless of where it was originally created."
Some of the material you have on your site does not even have the original authors name or even a link back to the original download. Even if both of these things are in place you are still in violation as none of these authors provided you with permission to post these works.
If you would like these works to be posted on your site in the future contact the author(s) and respectfully ask them to post it.
Jafo
Reply #8 Monday, July 9, 2007 10:40 AM
Reply #8 Monday, July 9, 2007 10:40 AM
DJ.Hmelnitzki
Proper procedure is NOT to take first and wait for complaint second.
It is to ASK first and [perhaps] receive consent second.
You are remote-linking to Deviantart.com content, however you are providing a frontend via your site which may or may not appeal to the artists whose works you are using/linking.
They have not given you permission to have their works displayed on, or associated with your site therefore they should be removed.
It is neither fair nor appropriate that you put the onus upon the artist to request the removal of their works' links.
SKoriginals
Reply #9 Monday, July 9, 2007 11:39 AM
Just to name a few more still on the site...
Yangge, Bohemy, Tycus, Aroche, Homeryulo, PoSmedley, kol, sternengalaxy, DanielFlaco, Maxdison, RPGFX, Tommy999999, continuum2, 007TINAR, VStyler, tehZERO (aka ZerO & rjsmith), PixelPirate, ^^Gabriel, Tiggz, Pat Kincaid, SkinFactory, Stardock, ChaNinja, essorant, danillooc, REMOLACIO, LightStar
This is hardly a complete list, but I guess gives everyone more of an idea here.
Reply #9 Monday, July 9, 2007 11:39 AM
Some of the author's windowblinds I recognized are Z71, lypnjta, Bushman, JJ Ying, navigatsio, MikeB314, basj, Josephs, Night Train, Boxxi, danilloc, and Butch 123
Just to name a few more still on the site...
Yangge, Bohemy, Tycus, Aroche, Homeryulo, PoSmedley, kol, sternengalaxy, DanielFlaco, Maxdison, RPGFX, Tommy999999, continuum2, 007TINAR, VStyler, tehZERO (aka ZerO & rjsmith), PixelPirate, ^^Gabriel, Tiggz, Pat Kincaid, SkinFactory, Stardock, ChaNinja, essorant, danillooc, REMOLACIO, LightStar
This is hardly a complete list, but I guess gives everyone more of an idea here.
dj.hmelnitzki
Reply #10 Monday, July 9, 2007 2:37 PM
Reply #10 Monday, July 9, 2007 2:37 PM
thanks to all for the postings
since i don't wanna violating the international Copyright Law i decide to take the page down untill i get some permission from authors.
since i don't wanna violating the international Copyright Law i decide to take the page down untill i get some permission from authors.
ZubaZ
Reply #11 Monday, July 9, 2007 3:04 PM
Reply #11 Monday, July 9, 2007 3:04 PM
since i don't wanna violating the international Copyright Law i decide to take the page down untill i get some permission from authors.
Good choice. Thanks!
va-deam
Reply #12 Monday, July 9, 2007 3:18 PM
Reply #12 Monday, July 9, 2007 3:18 PM
I couldn't believe my eyes reading all this "discussion".
Guys, are you living in Stone Age? There is no explanation to divide people into isolated groups with ridiculous rules inside. Xenophobia and racism are crimes in any civilized country.
Internet as it exists now, has no nationality, humans are equal in any country.Frankly speaking, Internet has no limitations: laws remain only words. Everybody is free to post any links and information they want. This is the "freedom of speech".
The next question is for designers: why do you do your work? Why do you post it here? What do you expect from users? Money? Success? Fame? The most common answer is fame. So let other people be excited with your creations and increase your "fame level".
In any ways I don't justify ripping, repacking or publishing material without specifying authors or links to their sites.
SKoriginals,
This is a nonsense to ask permission for linking to a public site (DevArt, for example). And the greater rot is to ask permission for personal use. Did at least one user asked permission for downloading? If you publish there, it becomes public for ever.
As for me, I believe this is the real popularity when other sites publish my work. I think it doesn't matter, from where the content is downloaded. The main thing is the content. I am 100% sure that every designer, who respects himself, enclose at least a readme-file or his name can be seen directly in application (like "Skin preview" in WB).
There is no need to cite pre-historical documents, because Internet appeared not so long ago. This document is not applicable here. Electronic interaction requires special legal documents.
By the way, www.computer-arts.info is situated in EU
and is attended by people from over 50 countries of the world. This is an international community. Why Russian?!
I am not trying to quarrel, but the things I wrote are so obvious... Peace!
Guys, are you living in Stone Age? There is no explanation to divide people into isolated groups with ridiculous rules inside. Xenophobia and racism are crimes in any civilized country.
Internet as it exists now, has no nationality, humans are equal in any country.Frankly speaking, Internet has no limitations: laws remain only words. Everybody is free to post any links and information they want. This is the "freedom of speech".
The next question is for designers: why do you do your work? Why do you post it here? What do you expect from users? Money? Success? Fame? The most common answer is fame. So let other people be excited with your creations and increase your "fame level".
In any ways I don't justify ripping, repacking or publishing material without specifying authors or links to their sites.
SKoriginals,
This is a nonsense to ask permission for linking to a public site (DevArt, for example). And the greater rot is to ask permission for personal use. Did at least one user asked permission for downloading? If you publish there, it becomes public for ever.
As for me, I believe this is the real popularity when other sites publish my work. I think it doesn't matter, from where the content is downloaded. The main thing is the content. I am 100% sure that every designer, who respects himself, enclose at least a readme-file or his name can be seen directly in application (like "Skin preview" in WB).
There is no need to cite pre-historical documents, because Internet appeared not so long ago. This document is not applicable here. Electronic interaction requires special legal documents.
By the way, www.computer-arts.info is situated in EU
and is attended by people from over 50 countries of the world. This is an international community. Why Russian?!I am not trying to quarrel, but the things I wrote are so obvious... Peace!
ArileenDesign
Reply #13 Monday, July 9, 2007 3:55 PM
Reply #13 Monday, July 9, 2007 3:55 PM
there are laws to protect artist stuff it's not for nothing and they should be respected Va-deam
HG_Eliminator
Reply #14 Monday, July 9, 2007 3:57 PM
Reply #14 Monday, July 9, 2007 3:57 PM
Its my property I upload for Private use by others.any other use needs AUTHORIZATION BY me....my material is not uploaded for some yahoo to build a site and use my stuff to pad his pockets by selling ad space while using mine and others stuff as bait for traffic..I control it's distribution on the net. not you....you get to look at it and apply it. you dont get to offer it out as your own, and by distributing it you try to take possesion and distribution rights away from me...and by offering it out for download you imply that you are an authorized representative of mine and have permission to do so...which is not the case...
also direct linking detracts traffic away from the site who hosts the files ,in hopes they will get the very traffic you are taking from them....so they pay the bills for the bandwidth and the server space and you get the rewards? please explain why you deem that as fair???? WC/DA and other's host authorized works for people to download they use the traffic to pay for the sites up keep.. if you steal that traffic they loose . we loose... get the picture?
build a legit site, get permissions and authorization. and you get respect and a place among the community..
Build a rip site and we will come with hell hounds on your heels...
also direct linking detracts traffic away from the site who hosts the files ,in hopes they will get the very traffic you are taking from them....so they pay the bills for the bandwidth and the server space and you get the rewards? please explain why you deem that as fair???? WC/DA and other's host authorized works for people to download they use the traffic to pay for the sites up keep.. if you steal that traffic they loose . we loose... get the picture?
build a legit site, get permissions and authorization. and you get respect and a place among the community..
Build a rip site and we will come with hell hounds on your heels...
SKoriginals
Reply #15 Monday, July 9, 2007 4:46 PM
The 'skins' of mine that were on the site were not linked back to the original download and NONE of the links were back to the original page but a link to the direct download on the original page. A link to the original PAGE where the skins were might have set better with most.
Not all skins have a 'read-me' file and/or a name attached. Even if there were, those things can be changed and/or omitted (and in the case of rippes sometimes are). The point is, this act is no different then me claiming I did one of Goya's paintings. Someone is taking credit and/or redistributing my material against my knowledge and permission. While 'faltering' it is still unlawful.
The 'pre-historical' document still applies. It is a copyright law and they do apply to material posted on the internet no matter what country (over 95% of the countries in the world have signed this). The internet is just one more medium.
There seems to be a common misconception among 'younger' internet users that everything on the internet is fair game to do with as you please. Again, this is just NOT true unless otherwise stated and posted that the material is freeware or whatever else.
Skinners post their work as a sort of service for others to enjoy and use personally. Not to be reposted everywhere around the internet. They choose where to post their works according to their own choice, be that whatever reason. Some skinners don't post material to certain sites because they just flat out don't like that site, other for lack of time.
Reply #15 Monday, July 9, 2007 4:46 PM
SKoriginals,
This is a nonsense to ask permission for linking to a public site (DevArt, for example). And the greater rot is to ask permission for personal use. Did at least one user asked permission for downloading? If you publish there, it becomes public for ever.
This is a nonsense to ask permission for linking to a public site (DevArt, for example). And the greater rot is to ask permission for personal use. Did at least one user asked permission for downloading? If you publish there, it becomes public for ever.
The 'skins' of mine that were on the site were not linked back to the original download and NONE of the links were back to the original page but a link to the direct download on the original page. A link to the original PAGE where the skins were might have set better with most.
As for me, I believe this is the real popularity when other sites publish my work. I think it doesn't matter, from where the content is downloaded. The main thing is the content. I am 100% sure that every designer, who respects himself, enclose at least a readme-file or his name can be seen directly in application (like "Skin preview" in WB).
Not all skins have a 'read-me' file and/or a name attached. Even if there were, those things can be changed and/or omitted (and in the case of rippes sometimes are). The point is, this act is no different then me claiming I did one of Goya's paintings. Someone is taking credit and/or redistributing my material against my knowledge and permission. While 'faltering' it is still unlawful.
There is no need to cite pre-historical documents, because Internet appeared not so long ago. This document is not applicable here. Electronic interaction requires special legal documents.
The 'pre-historical' document still applies. It is a copyright law and they do apply to material posted on the internet no matter what country (over 95% of the countries in the world have signed this). The internet is just one more medium.
There seems to be a common misconception among 'younger' internet users that everything on the internet is fair game to do with as you please. Again, this is just NOT true unless otherwise stated and posted that the material is freeware or whatever else.
Skinners post their work as a sort of service for others to enjoy and use personally. Not to be reposted everywhere around the internet. They choose where to post their works according to their own choice, be that whatever reason. Some skinners don't post material to certain sites because they just flat out don't like that site, other for lack of time.
va-deam
Reply #16 Monday, July 9, 2007 4:51 PM
Reply #16 Monday, July 9, 2007 4:51 PM
HG_Eliminator, probably you're not dedicated to marketing. Let me explain on basics.
A factory produces the goods, you go to the nearest mediator (e.g.shop) and get what you want. The mediator is the "ripping"-site, the goods are GUI stuff and the factory is a known public site. In other words, you provide your work without asking money and on a public site to any ordinary user for private use.
Imagine all internet surfers. Then you have to admit: no-one knows every site in the world. People use google to navigate. That is why one share of surfers knows public site and regularly visit it, other is not familiar. These people use other internet resources to find news. In the end both shares will know about your work at public site. That is how you increase your audience.
Then you complain about traffic. But don't you know, that hosting is not free for normal sites? Both mediator-sites and public sites pay bills. And both of them advertise. This is normal practice. But public site pays a bit more - this is the price of popularity and ratings. Mediator-sites are often to reupload original archives to mass-share sites (Like Rapidshare).
More people - more money. It seems to me, your goal is not fame, but money. I can advise you to make your own site and promote only there your work with severe restrictions.
Some time ago there was a precedent. One commercial site took icons from one very famous and talented artist and used directly in their site interface (this is the POSESSION). This is the real violation. Hein Mevissen had not been releasing for a long time since that.
Real commercial use (as I described) does not equal your subjective perception. Please do not use sophistry and don't substitute concepts.
A factory produces the goods, you go to the nearest mediator (e.g.shop) and get what you want. The mediator is the "ripping"-site, the goods are GUI stuff and the factory is a known public site. In other words, you provide your work without asking money and on a public site to any ordinary user for private use.
Imagine all internet surfers. Then you have to admit: no-one knows every site in the world. People use google to navigate. That is why one share of surfers knows public site and regularly visit it, other is not familiar. These people use other internet resources to find news. In the end both shares will know about your work at public site. That is how you increase your audience.
Then you complain about traffic. But don't you know, that hosting is not free for normal sites? Both mediator-sites and public sites pay bills. And both of them advertise. This is normal practice. But public site pays a bit more - this is the price of popularity and ratings. Mediator-sites are often to reupload original archives to mass-share sites (Like Rapidshare).
More people - more money. It seems to me, your goal is not fame, but money. I can advise you to make your own site and promote only there your work with severe restrictions.
Some time ago there was a precedent. One commercial site took icons from one very famous and talented artist and used directly in their site interface (this is the POSESSION). This is the real violation. Hein Mevissen had not been releasing for a long time since that.
Real commercial use (as I described) does not equal your subjective perception. Please do not use sophistry and don't substitute concepts.
SKoriginals
Reply #17 Monday, July 9, 2007 5:09 PM
I applauded dj.hmelnitzki for doing what is right in correcting the problem. If permission were asked to post my material I would have more then likely provided it. The fact remains my skins are posted for personal use ONLY, this does not include reposting on another site for that sites use.
Reply #17 Monday, July 9, 2007 5:09 PM
thanks to all for the postings
since i don't wanna violating the international Copyright Law i decide to take the page down untill i get some permission from authors.
since i don't wanna violating the international Copyright Law i decide to take the page down untill i get some permission from authors.
I applauded dj.hmelnitzki for doing what is right in correcting the problem. If permission were asked to post my material I would have more then likely provided it. The fact remains my skins are posted for personal use ONLY, this does not include reposting on another site for that sites use.
HG_Eliminator
Reply #18 Monday, July 9, 2007 5:09 PM
Reply #18 Monday, July 9, 2007 5:09 PM
it dont matter what I post and where .. reproduction of it and distribution of it without my prior consent is not allowed and is copyright infringement...if they were posting a screen shot with my stuff being used, then that would fall under fan art.... but this is not screen shots, these are downloads/distribution...which is taking away my right to control the distribution and use of my content/material........
me and most here would agree we dont need or want any site hosting our stuff that dont respect us enough to ask our permission....
it boils down to morals and common decency, which it seems on the net, some people loose theirs or just never had any.....
I like many others here dont need or want the kind of publicity RIP or warez sites have to offer...and yes I compare RIP sites to warez sites, as they both offer illegally distributed items......and both are bad in my eyes...
me and most here would agree we dont need or want any site hosting our stuff that dont respect us enough to ask our permission....
it boils down to morals and common decency, which it seems on the net, some people loose theirs or just never had any.....
I like many others here dont need or want the kind of publicity RIP or warez sites have to offer...and yes I compare RIP sites to warez sites, as they both offer illegally distributed items......and both are bad in my eyes...
jazzymjr
Reply #19 Monday, July 9, 2007 5:20 PM
I don't want to start something, but I can't be quiet about this.
The key phrase in your statement above is "private use". I don't call taking a bunch of skins and posting a scrreenshot of them on another site as private use. And, the other thing is that this kind of thing promotes that site: they get people to their site, but don't have to pay for the bandwith, since they don't store the files there. The original site is paying the bandwith, and losing out on trafic. I don't see how this type of behavior is legal!
That's my two cents worth!
Reply #19 Monday, July 9, 2007 5:20 PM
A factory produces the goods, you go to the nearest mediator (e.g.shop) and get what you want. The mediator is the "ripping"-site, the goods are GUI stuff and the factory is a known public site. In other words, you provide your work without asking money and on a public site to any ordinary user for private use.
I don't want to start something, but I can't be quiet about this.
The key phrase in your statement above is "private use". I don't call taking a bunch of skins and posting a scrreenshot of them on another site as private use. And, the other thing is that this kind of thing promotes that site: they get people to their site, but don't have to pay for the bandwith, since they don't store the files there. The original site is paying the bandwith, and losing out on trafic. I don't see how this type of behavior is legal!
That's my two cents worth!
Jafo
Reply #20 Monday, July 9, 2007 5:53 PM
Reply #20 Monday, July 9, 2007 5:53 PM
Data-mining another site's content for profit or gain is hardly legal.
It is not a question of fame OR fortune that someone may or may not want their property displayed/accessed elsewhere. The ONLY person profitting from such property/copyright abuse is the site owner.
This issue is that same old issue of Intellectual property rights, or, in the case of this content....Artists' Copyright.
There are many 'pre-historical' documents. Some actually currently apply, as their age does not weary them....eg. the US Constitution ain't no spring chicken....shall we dismiss it for its dust?
And sorry, mate it [Berne Treaty] actually DOES still apply.
Artists/skinners very happily put their works on such public sites as WC, DA, Custo, SA, etc because their 'market reach' is massive and doesn't need to be enhanced by backyard profiteers leeching [data-mining] the content.
Were such leeching purely altruistic prior consent would be sought.
Since it wasn't [and since subsequent comments from its admin/owner] it can be assumed it was done through ignorance of copyright restriction/s.
Again, people CHOOSE where and when their artistic works are displayed. Finding them subsequently displayed on a site without their permission is a slap-in-the-face insult and violation of their property rights [though some will always be oblivious to/ ignore their property rights and think such redistribution is 'fame'].
The upside of all this is that the site owner is now intending to remove the content/page until appropriate consent is obtained....and we salute his choice of action....
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 1 of 2 | |
|
|---|
Reply #1 Sunday, July 8, 2007 1:17 PM