The Skin Patch Debate
Monday, February 24, 2003 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
There is a new technology being developed but its eventual available form will be heavily dependent on the input of thousands of users such as you.
Each year, thousands of skins are created and released. Skins take many many hours to create. But often times, once released, they are never updated. As the software for these skins gains in function, these skins come to look outdated and are no longer used. The proposed answer: Skin patching.
Please read this next part carefully: What Skin patching does is allow third parties to submit updates to an existing skin. But these updates do not contain any parts from the original skins. Instead, they only contain the pieces that have been updated. Or in other words, patches are completely seperate files in themselves. The actual "patching" takes place in software. It would download the original skin and then the updates would be provided as additional sub-styles. If the user applies one of those sub-styles, the program the original skin and then includes the updates when it applies.
For example, let's say someone created a really nice WindowBlinds skin in 2001. But this skin doesn't support Windows XP Start bars, doesn't support the task panel (shellstyle), doesn't support the slider control nor does it support the logon/logoff dialog skinning.
Five different users could submit "patches" to this skin.
Patch 1 would just have the task panel (shellstyle).
Patch 2 would just be the logon/logoff dialog skinning
Patch 3 would have the have the XP Start bar
Patch 4 would have the slider control
Patch 5 would be another rendition of the task panel and it would have the XP Start bar and the logon/logoff skinning.
On a site like WinCustomize (or any other site that supported this technology), when the user chose to download the skin, it would bring up a dialog asking which patches (if any) a user would like to also download.
Once downloaded, when the user went to apply the skin it would bring up a dialog asking which patches they would like to apply. The updates would be displayed to user by widget (so patch 5 contains 3 widgets whereas the others are 1 widget each) to choose which pieces to use.
In this way, older skins could be updated by fans and the original effort to create the skin would be rewarded by keeping the skin fresh and new over the long term.
So where is the debate? How much say should the skin author have? WinCustomize is known for being very protective of skin author rights. But there is the conflict in wanting skin authors work to be kept useful and worthwhile over the long run. Obviously any skin patch that used the original author's graphics would need express written consent. But what about skin patches that don't use any of the graphics from the original skin? I.e. a Shellstyle wouldn't need graphics from the original skin and neither would an XP Start bar. Additionally, what policies should be by default?
Stardock's view is to make it so that the original skin author has the right to deny any skin patches be made for their skin (or at least displayed as part of the skin). Additionally, it believes that original author should have the right to reject individual skin patches from being displayed. But there is also the matter on what the default is. By default, should skin patches be allowed on skins where the author is long gone? Stardock's view is presently that skin patches on those skins would be allowed based on the discretion of the moderator and if the original author returns they can then change the setting if they so choose. This way, the thousands of existing skins can gain a second life and it is Stardock's view that the vast majority of MIA skin authors would prefer that. Moderators would still reject any skin patch that used artwork from the original skin without express written consent however.
What's your view?
Each year, thousands of skins are created and released. Skins take many many hours to create. But often times, once released, they are never updated. As the software for these skins gains in function, these skins come to look outdated and are no longer used. The proposed answer: Skin patching.
Please read this next part carefully: What Skin patching does is allow third parties to submit updates to an existing skin. But these updates do not contain any parts from the original skins. Instead, they only contain the pieces that have been updated. Or in other words, patches are completely seperate files in themselves. The actual "patching" takes place in software. It would download the original skin and then the updates would be provided as additional sub-styles. If the user applies one of those sub-styles, the program the original skin and then includes the updates when it applies.
For example, let's say someone created a really nice WindowBlinds skin in 2001. But this skin doesn't support Windows XP Start bars, doesn't support the task panel (shellstyle), doesn't support the slider control nor does it support the logon/logoff dialog skinning.
Five different users could submit "patches" to this skin.
Patch 1 would just have the task panel (shellstyle).
Patch 2 would just be the logon/logoff dialog skinning
Patch 3 would have the have the XP Start bar
Patch 4 would have the slider control
Patch 5 would be another rendition of the task panel and it would have the XP Start bar and the logon/logoff skinning.
On a site like WinCustomize (or any other site that supported this technology), when the user chose to download the skin, it would bring up a dialog asking which patches (if any) a user would like to also download.
Once downloaded, when the user went to apply the skin it would bring up a dialog asking which patches they would like to apply. The updates would be displayed to user by widget (so patch 5 contains 3 widgets whereas the others are 1 widget each) to choose which pieces to use.
In this way, older skins could be updated by fans and the original effort to create the skin would be rewarded by keeping the skin fresh and new over the long term.
So where is the debate? How much say should the skin author have? WinCustomize is known for being very protective of skin author rights. But there is the conflict in wanting skin authors work to be kept useful and worthwhile over the long run. Obviously any skin patch that used the original author's graphics would need express written consent. But what about skin patches that don't use any of the graphics from the original skin? I.e. a Shellstyle wouldn't need graphics from the original skin and neither would an XP Start bar. Additionally, what policies should be by default?
Stardock's view is to make it so that the original skin author has the right to deny any skin patches be made for their skin (or at least displayed as part of the skin). Additionally, it believes that original author should have the right to reject individual skin patches from being displayed. But there is also the matter on what the default is. By default, should skin patches be allowed on skins where the author is long gone? Stardock's view is presently that skin patches on those skins would be allowed based on the discretion of the moderator and if the original author returns they can then change the setting if they so choose. This way, the thousands of existing skins can gain a second life and it is Stardock's view that the vast majority of MIA skin authors would prefer that. Moderators would still reject any skin patch that used artwork from the original skin without express written consent however.
What's your view?
 |
|
Page 8 of 9 | |
|
|---|
WOM
Reply #142 Saturday, March 1, 2003 2:03 PM
Reply #142 Saturday, March 1, 2003 2:03 PM
If it is a question of opt-in or opt-out then I think the artist needs to check the opt-in if they want to participate. Having said that, the final patch would still need the origional artists approval before being able to be submitted.
adni18
Reply #143 Saturday, March 1, 2003 4:49 PM
Reply #143 Saturday, March 1, 2003 4:49 PM
What happen to you Fuzzy??? I see a Madam in fron of your name... 
Sorry, that I am out of subject, but it is funny!
Sorry, that I am out of subject, but it is funny!
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #144 Saturday, March 1, 2003 6:08 PM
Reply #144 Saturday, March 1, 2003 6:08 PM
It was my operation adni, I had some implants done at the same time
Peff
Reply #146 Saturday, March 1, 2003 8:02 PM
Reply #146 Saturday, March 1, 2003 8:02 PM
Fuzzy is now the most popular guy at the Gym....For SURE!!
solarlove
Reply #148 Saturday, March 1, 2003 9:04 PM
Reply #148 Saturday, March 1, 2003 9:04 PM
I have a question... Where do you "draw the line?" 
I mean for instance... "Winstyles" puts together skins from different authors into a "suite" to faciliate customizing the whole user interface rather than just one single part of it. In this rapidly changing environment of digital media and ever evolving technologies it's easy to see how things can become rather complicated. It's almost like the "sampling" controversy in the music industry... where a recording artist "samples" music from a previous source to create a new piece of music. Ideally I feel the original artist should either validate the process by agreeing that her or his original artwork/skin can be included for use in any publicly available "suites" or "patches", or should invalidate the process by making it known that their skins are not to be tampered with! In the case that an artist has not given consent regarding whether their artwork/skins shall be included into "suites" and "patches" and otherwise is not available to be contacted I would suggest that their artwork be automatically allowed to be included into "suites" and "patches" with the proper credit given to the original artist/skinner and of course promptly removed if in the future the artist decides to revoke permission or make it known that they would like to not participate in the first place! ...Just had to get that off of my chest! hahaha lol
I mean for instance... "Winstyles" puts together skins from different authors into a "suite" to faciliate customizing the whole user interface rather than just one single part of it. In this rapidly changing environment of digital media and ever evolving technologies it's easy to see how things can become rather complicated. It's almost like the "sampling" controversy in the music industry... where a recording artist "samples" music from a previous source to create a new piece of music. Ideally I feel the original artist should either validate the process by agreeing that her or his original artwork/skin can be included for use in any publicly available "suites" or "patches", or should invalidate the process by making it known that their skins are not to be tampered with! In the case that an artist has not given consent regarding whether their artwork/skins shall be included into "suites" and "patches" and otherwise is not available to be contacted I would suggest that their artwork be automatically allowed to be included into "suites" and "patches" with the proper credit given to the original artist/skinner and of course promptly removed if in the future the artist decides to revoke permission or make it known that they would like to not participate in the first place! ...Just had to get that off of my chest! hahaha lol
elvee
Reply #149 Saturday, March 1, 2003 10:21 PM
Reply #149 Saturday, March 1, 2003 10:21 PM
WinStyles Suites are nothing more than a Screenshot with links. What is the difference between going to all the different links and downloading the parts of the theme Manually, loading up each program separately, Creating a screenshot, uploading it saying "Hey! Look what I did!". As opposed to a nifty little program that creates a text file of commands to the same links. Downloads, intalls to the right directory, and loads them for you?....Time, Convenience, and Fun!!!!!
Why must people fuss over something that does the same thing you would do yourself, only it does it better and is more fun?
Naturally when you make a WinStyle Suite, you give credit where credit is due. In some cases when it is a Suite from one artist, or it is a .XPTheme,...Permission must be granted before uploading.
I have seen plenty of submissions in the screenshot library where submitters have in the Theme description, Credit and links to what made his/her desktop possible...I see no gripes there.
So whats the beef with WinStyles?
Why must people fuss over something that does the same thing you would do yourself, only it does it better and is more fun?
Naturally when you make a WinStyle Suite, you give credit where credit is due. In some cases when it is a Suite from one artist, or it is a .XPTheme,...Permission must be granted before uploading.
I have seen plenty of submissions in the screenshot library where submitters have in the Theme description, Credit and links to what made his/her desktop possible...I see no gripes there.
So whats the beef with WinStyles?
paxx
Reply #150 Saturday, March 1, 2003 10:54 PM
Reply #150 Saturday, March 1, 2003 10:54 PM
No beef with Winstyles, LV.
I just don't like it much. I've never downloaded a Winstyle themes. I have only 2 themes I think, and they were given to me by friends who made them.
I like to have my different skins individually. Dunno, I get more freedom of doing what I want this way.
Must it's true that's convenient to bundle everything together. But I still prefer the freedom over the convenience.
But that was off topic.
I just don't like it much. I've never downloaded a Winstyle themes. I have only 2 themes I think, and they were given to me by friends who made them.
I like to have my different skins individually. Dunno, I get more freedom of doing what I want this way.
Must it's true that's convenient to bundle everything together. But I still prefer the freedom over the convenience.
But that was off topic.
bakerstreet
Reply #151 Saturday, March 1, 2003 10:54 PM
Reply #151 Saturday, March 1, 2003 10:54 PM
having pondered it a bit more...
Mix and matching total works are just complex ways of delivering the content to the user. Nothing is really created, technically; it is just a 'serving suggestion', or packaging. Patching, on the other hand manipulates or changes the original work, even if it is "just" the skin settings or scripting. Lets not forget the scripting skill it takes to makes these skins work. Will the graphics be the only protected part? If the work, like Adobe Photoshop, was designed to accept third-party functionality, great. I don't see that here.
Fact is, honestly, it may not be legal.
Microsoft, Sony, etc., believes that modchips, i.e. pieces of third-party hardware a user can use to replace the original hardware in their privately owned machines, are illegal. They believe it so much that commercial sites are closed and people are arrested for selling them. Their belief is made concrete since reverse engineering has become illegal. The act of taking something apart to see how it works is now basically verboten if the creator insists on it; especially software.
If skins and themes are going to be classed as anything in terms of protection, software would be it. Complex items like LS themes, Winamp 3 and WMP skins are unmistakably software, but even the most flat, un-complex skin should receive the same consideration.
So.
By patching old skins to change their appearance or functionality, you are either a) creating a derivative work, or
creating something that allows a third party to create a derivative work. In addition, the original work has at some level been reverse engineered to create the patch. Do most of us mind someone taking our stuff apart to learn or to change it for their own use? Heck no! Would it suck *really* bad if we assumed everyone felt the same? I think it would.
The only way this would be acceptable is if an opt-in checkbox were added to every skin entry, and nothing could be made until the owner of the work came back and agreed. Even then, you have to deal with people who change their minds. Will you delete the patches when the original creator hates them and un-checks the box? If you make it permanent status for a skin, won't people just delete the original skins if a mod appears that they hate?
I have no idea how this will work. If it is attempted, it seems like it will be endlessly annoying to all parties concerned. I vote no.
Mix and matching total works are just complex ways of delivering the content to the user. Nothing is really created, technically; it is just a 'serving suggestion', or packaging. Patching, on the other hand manipulates or changes the original work, even if it is "just" the skin settings or scripting. Lets not forget the scripting skill it takes to makes these skins work. Will the graphics be the only protected part? If the work, like Adobe Photoshop, was designed to accept third-party functionality, great. I don't see that here.
Fact is, honestly, it may not be legal.
Microsoft, Sony, etc., believes that modchips, i.e. pieces of third-party hardware a user can use to replace the original hardware in their privately owned machines, are illegal. They believe it so much that commercial sites are closed and people are arrested for selling them. Their belief is made concrete since reverse engineering has become illegal. The act of taking something apart to see how it works is now basically verboten if the creator insists on it; especially software.
If skins and themes are going to be classed as anything in terms of protection, software would be it. Complex items like LS themes, Winamp 3 and WMP skins are unmistakably software, but even the most flat, un-complex skin should receive the same consideration.
So.
By patching old skins to change their appearance or functionality, you are either a) creating a derivative work, or
creating something that allows a third party to create a derivative work. In addition, the original work has at some level been reverse engineered to create the patch. Do most of us mind someone taking our stuff apart to learn or to change it for their own use? Heck no! Would it suck *really* bad if we assumed everyone felt the same? I think it would.The only way this would be acceptable is if an opt-in checkbox were added to every skin entry, and nothing could be made until the owner of the work came back and agreed. Even then, you have to deal with people who change their minds. Will you delete the patches when the original creator hates them and un-checks the box? If you make it permanent status for a skin, won't people just delete the original skins if a mod appears that they hate?
I have no idea how this will work. If it is attempted, it seems like it will be endlessly annoying to all parties concerned. I vote no.
paxx
Reply #152 Saturday, March 1, 2003 11:02 PM
Reply #152 Saturday, March 1, 2003 11:02 PM
I don't think any check box could work.
I don't think a lot of people would accept to make a skin "patchable" by anybody, regardless of the newbie's talent or the quality of the end result.
More likely, skinner will want to see what the other guy did and then say Hey or Nay. Also a skinner may want to control the number of patches available. Heck, he may want to have one ONE OFFICAL patch made by one person, and accept no other ones.
Checkbox wouldn't work.
It has to be done like tit is now for any port. The regular email permission way.
I don't think a lot of people would accept to make a skin "patchable" by anybody, regardless of the newbie's talent or the quality of the end result.
More likely, skinner will want to see what the other guy did and then say Hey or Nay. Also a skinner may want to control the number of patches available. Heck, he may want to have one ONE OFFICAL patch made by one person, and accept no other ones.
Checkbox wouldn't work.
It has to be done like tit is now for any port. The regular email permission way.
elvee
Reply #154 Saturday, March 1, 2003 11:08 PM
Reply #154 Saturday, March 1, 2003 11:08 PM
Sorry paxx, but I could'nt help myself
Ok...Back to topic...I am not a skinner so my opinion means diddly squat
but I think the patching concept is great if it could only please everyone involved...my tarnished two pennies
Ok...Back to topic...I am not a skinner so my opinion means diddly squat
but I think the patching concept is great if it could only please everyone involved...my tarnished two pennies
Frogboy
Reply #155 Saturday, March 1, 2003 11:30 PM
Reply #155 Saturday, March 1, 2003 11:30 PM
Even today, a user of WindowBlinds can choose to use the Start Bar from skin A with the rest coming from Skin B.
There are lots of potential solutions for this sort of thing. The challenge is to find a way that satisfies both users and skin authors.
For example, the whole thing could be done at the software level.
Example:
Section 1: The WindowBlinds section
Section 2: WindowBlinds Widgets (we already have such a section)
A user could submit a widget to the WindowBlinds widget area and as part of their upload list specific WB skins that their widget was designed to enhance. Moderators could then make the judgement over whether the widget is of acceptable quality (or abusing the system by claiming it is for all skins).
Then, WindowBlinds or WinStyles or the WinCustomize browser could offer users additional substyles that are created on the fly by looking in the widget section.
For instance, WBMania is a great skin. DAK has been MIA for quite awhile. Let's say I made a shellstyle for it and put it in the widget area.
A user of WBMania from the WindowBlinds config dialog could choose "Additional Styles..." from the sub-style combo box. It would then go to WinCustomize's database and then have a checkbox of various available extensions on the net such as [X] WBMania Shellstyle by Frogboy [X] WBMania XP Start bar by Alexandrie, and so on.
If the original skin author were to click on the checkbox to support skin patches, then these widgets would be linked in the original skin's listing as available extensions. And when a widget is accepted by a moderator, then that original skin could be re-listed as "updated" -- thus giving the original skin author a benefit to allowing others to provide seperate widgets.
What do you guys think of that?
There are lots of potential solutions for this sort of thing. The challenge is to find a way that satisfies both users and skin authors.
For example, the whole thing could be done at the software level.
Example:
Section 1: The WindowBlinds section
Section 2: WindowBlinds Widgets (we already have such a section)
A user could submit a widget to the WindowBlinds widget area and as part of their upload list specific WB skins that their widget was designed to enhance. Moderators could then make the judgement over whether the widget is of acceptable quality (or abusing the system by claiming it is for all skins).
Then, WindowBlinds or WinStyles or the WinCustomize browser could offer users additional substyles that are created on the fly by looking in the widget section.
For instance, WBMania is a great skin. DAK has been MIA for quite awhile. Let's say I made a shellstyle for it and put it in the widget area.
A user of WBMania from the WindowBlinds config dialog could choose "Additional Styles..." from the sub-style combo box. It would then go to WinCustomize's database and then have a checkbox of various available extensions on the net such as [X] WBMania Shellstyle by Frogboy [X] WBMania XP Start bar by Alexandrie, and so on.
If the original skin author were to click on the checkbox to support skin patches, then these widgets would be linked in the original skin's listing as available extensions. And when a widget is accepted by a moderator, then that original skin could be re-listed as "updated" -- thus giving the original skin author a benefit to allowing others to provide seperate widgets.
What do you guys think of that?
Iben
Reply #156 Sunday, March 2, 2003 12:14 AM
Reply #156 Sunday, March 2, 2003 12:14 AM
Admin Frogboy
Would these widgets be kept in a separate folder in the users computer?
And could the user select a widget to use with a certain skin today and then select a different widget by a different author tomorrow for the same feature add on,for the same skin?
Would these widgets be kept in a separate folder in the users computer?
And could the user select a widget to use with a certain skin today and then select a different widget by a different author tomorrow for the same feature add on,for the same skin?
JamMeister33
Reply #157 Sunday, March 2, 2003 12:24 AM
Reply #157 Sunday, March 2, 2003 12:24 AM
This gets more and more interesting.....
the excellent pros versus the excellent cons are high entertainment, baby... yeah!
I keep going one way and then the other way...
the excellent pros versus the excellent cons are high entertainment, baby... yeah!
I keep going one way and then the other way...
paxx
Reply #158 Sunday, March 2, 2003 9:43 AM
Reply #158 Sunday, March 2, 2003 9:43 AM
Frogboy, when a user mixes and matches different skins on HIS computer, it's perfectly right. The same as people can edit, modify, distort, any skin or wallpaper, as long as it stays on his own computer.
But when people start uploading patches that they specifically made to go with another person's skin, that's when it's not acceptable anymore, unless the original author gave his OK. If the author is gone, well so are the skins.
Also, I don't agree about the checkbox to support skin patches. That means that there is only two choices:
- I don't want anybody EVER patching this skin
- I want to let anybody in the World make patches for this skin without ever asking me what I thought of it.
There should be a third checkbox for people who agree to let people make patches for the skin, as long as they get asked their permission and as long as they get to approve the quality of the final work.
But when people start uploading patches that they specifically made to go with another person's skin, that's when it's not acceptable anymore, unless the original author gave his OK. If the author is gone, well so are the skins.
Also, I don't agree about the checkbox to support skin patches. That means that there is only two choices:
- I don't want anybody EVER patching this skin
- I want to let anybody in the World make patches for this skin without ever asking me what I thought of it.
There should be a third checkbox for people who agree to let people make patches for the skin, as long as they get asked their permission and as long as they get to approve the quality of the final work.
WOM
Reply #159 Sunday, March 2, 2003 10:06 AM
Reply #159 Sunday, March 2, 2003 10:06 AM
I think paxx kit on a good idea. The third choice. The can do, with permission and the final approvel.
In Frogboys #155 he says he makes a shellstyle for DAK's skin. I can't see how he would match the colors up unless he ports it. If that happens then I was under the impression that would need permission included with the upload.
From what I see here at WC, there are a lot of people making things for other peoples skins already. IE: jebland doing objectBars for skins(with permission)and there are others that I can't remember right now. I don't think we need to change anything. If someone wants to do a Shellstyle for a skin let them ask the creator of that skin for permission.
Why fix something thats not broke. Why create a potential mess.
In Frogboys #155 he says he makes a shellstyle for DAK's skin. I can't see how he would match the colors up unless he ports it. If that happens then I was under the impression that would need permission included with the upload.
From what I see here at WC, there are a lot of people making things for other peoples skins already. IE: jebland doing objectBars for skins(with permission)and there are others that I can't remember right now. I don't think we need to change anything. If someone wants to do a Shellstyle for a skin let them ask the creator of that skin for permission.
Why fix something thats not broke. Why create a potential mess.
White_Moth
Reply #160 Sunday, March 2, 2003 12:22 PM
Reply #160 Sunday, March 2, 2003 12:22 PM
Wow, I must have a very interesting part of my brain I know nothing about, because it saw all of this just before my 1st post on this thread.
All I can say now is, why not just try it and see how it works. It may end up being the greatest thing yet, or, it will be another "Widgets for SkinStudio".
All I can say now is, why not just try it and see how it works. It may end up being the greatest thing yet, or, it will be another "Widgets for SkinStudio".
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 8 of 9 | |
|
|---|
Reply #141 Saturday, March 1, 2003 1:49 PM
I have a few WB skins on my pc from pre WC days by artists who are no longer skinning (here anyway). It would be great if they worked on WB4. As it is, they are great works of art unused. Shame. Patches could be useful if done properly and such skins could make a comeback. But as I said, only if the patch is seen and approved by the original author. No other permission is good enough.