No problems or worries Baker. I hear you just fine. As far as I am concerned my original question was answered a long time ago.

Duff on the other hand, needs to get a clue.

Oh, and I didn't come here to argue. I've been here for awhile, just never really bother to post. Now that I do... asking a simple question, this is what I get in responce?

If you want to argue, we can. Start a debate topic and I'll show you my lack of knowledge versus your bounty of knowledge. But it doesn't matter, didn't come here to make enemies. Let's just enjoy a few glasses of Duff and get drunk and forget about it.

no thanks I prefer budweiser....

Needs to get a clue?..... Forget it. If I ever break a copyright law, I'm sure one of you here would kindly notify me. Until then, have a good day.

Duff: don't get all worked out on Bakerstreet's account.
Bakerstreet is Bakerstreet, a one of a kind kinda guy.

We love him, but he sure appreciates a good argument when he sees one.

Finally, as an admin, I can tell you the basic rule, although there can be exceptions: if you didn't make it, don't upload it. 

Duff: I'm sorry if I was short with you or 'vague'. I'll restate as clearly as possible.

*If you want to know the letter of the law, go read it, it is publicly available online, as are the 'Terms of Use' for about any software you wanna take the graphics from.

*If you are asking what you can get away with here, then you already had your answer a half-dozen times. If you are really concerned with copyrights, what you can get away with won't matter anyway.

*You don't need anyone to notify about violations you if you take the most sound advice and don't upload anything you didn't make.


Paxx: Actually, I *hate* this particular argument.

Essentially, post #27 covered the stance generally taken by skinning and skinning related sites.

Call it a 'softening' of the strict copyright law which would have you specifically seek and obtain specific and particular prior permission for any and every pixel combination/arrangement which was not absolutely 100% of your own doing.

If there was any association or similarity or inspiration from another's work then it was/is not 100% and MUST be accompanied by written, verifyable consent.

The 'absolute' is untenable, as, for example, it could then be argued that exactly ONE glassy buttonned work would be allowed but ALL others were derivations and must be rejected.

The adherence to any law of any sort cannot be a blanket absolute, as their adoption must be practical and workable in conflicting circumstances NOT covered by their 'inclusions'/sphere of reference.

Consequently, as stated above, when someone submits an eyeball icon for Photoshop [albeit glassy] it is assumed it has been derived from the original included graphics FOR that proggy, unless stated otherwise.

What is desirable is that any work submitted, be it a Wall, OR an icon be sufficiently documented to declare its ancestry......in other words if it's fan-art say so and link to the source material.  If it's an icon of obscure heritage being 'utilised' to create a LiteSTEP shortcut again make a note and link to its source.

This sort of additional documentation 'may' be a pain in the ass for people but it makes the submission's heritage 'transparent' and means that if and when the originator of a work takes umbrage with its re-use the ownership and its rights are clear and evident....and can be addressed.

The argument of pedantry that usually surfaced at Devart over this sort of issue usually resulted in some prat claiming God created EVERYTHING and all things are stolen from him......

Reality demands a sensible approach to what is NOT a simple argument.

Every day the admins at Wincusto have to deal with all the permutations/interpretations/opinions of what constitutes 'copyright' and what is 'fair use' and every single person will have his opinion which of course is the only correct one.

However, what ultimately determines what does or does not successfully make it onto this site is a combination of what the administration determines is salient along with what the resultant members are happy with submitting.

On a site with no policing of submissions you will get incontrovertable issues [measured by 'our' community's values], whereas on a site such as here, Wincustomize.com, the worst you will get [hopefully] is something which does not always gel or sit well with one's black-and-white concept of absolutes, but is a working interpretation of what is generally wanted and accepted by our specific community as a whole.

So.....read my earlier post....and this one.....and if there are any further examples needing clarification, - ask any of the admins for their opinion/interpretation....

If this ideology is abhorrent to your personal values then I'm sure there is a still-born community out there for you somewhere which has already expired under its own reluctance to bend before the winds of reality...

"If this ideology is abhorrent to your personal values then I'm sure there is a still-born community out there for you somewhere which has already expired under its own reluctance to bend before the winds of reality..."

yup, fer them whut don't savvy high-falootin' talk, thems fancy words for "If you don't like it, leave."

Never saw that one coming...

Baker....but that's really the point....like if you join a Ford car club but don't like Fords, preferring GM.....makes more sense to find a GM club, doesn't it?....

Duff... here's some info on the subject.......  http://www.rightsforartists.com/   

Ok a question for admin, if I make a theme(WB) with Final Fantasy graphics on it(characters, ff logo...) Do I need to ask their permission? and A Corvette WB skin? I'm all confused about these copyright stuff, so please help me out here

Ok a question for admin, if I make a theme(WB) with Final Fantasy graphics on it(characters, ff logo...) Do I need to ask their permission? and A Corvette WB skin? I'm all confused about these copyright stuff, so please help me out here

My understanding is you need permission to upload it, but not for personal use.

Sorry Geoffrey Montgomery, since admins on this site decides whether permission is needed or not I will wait for their reply.

The final fantasy theme would be included in the category of 'fan art' which ideally would still 'need' permission/consent but in public site common-use would be accepted provided there was a clear indication as to the source of the 'fan' images [that they were indeed such and not original creations].

Fan art that is derived from another's interpretation of 'fan art' , rather than from the source game image would be considered not 'OK'.

Example....

A site has a blue game image in right-hand orientation.

'Fan #1' mods it by making it red and reversing it.

You borrow Fan #1's image and use it instead of the source game image.

Then there's a problem.

It all sounds iffy and tenuous....and in an ideal world absolutely NOTHING not your own would be uploaded anywhere for any reason, no matter what.

In that case, however, it would follow that ALL screenshots were unlawful as they ALL contain portions of graphics or even fonts that are not yours to 'duplicate' or 'distribute'.

And THAT is exactly why there needs to be a reality check with common sense.

Without that nasty 'grey area' there would be no skinning of any form what-so-ever.

No EULA specifically states permission to distribute through screenshot the Iexplore.exe icon, for example [yet it shows up on many screenshots].  No EULA states specifically that you may actually alter and/or create ANY variation of a launch icon to be associated with that program.

Surely each and every alternate shell to Explorer.exe is in violation of some rule and/or regulation somewhere in the bowels of MS copyright as these shells interface with the MS kernel without specific formal consent to do so.

Lots of validation for grey areas when you think about it...

"No EULA specifically states permission to distribute through screenshot the Iexplore.exe icon, for example [yet it shows up on many screenshots]."

Thankfully, though, copyright law allows for 'incidental use', like a copyrighted image happening to be in a news report, or an image of an icon being incidentally included in an screenshot of someone's desktop. If I take a picture of my car and upload it to Ebay to sell, the image of the automaker's logo is incidental, and if I upload an image of my desktop and there is an IE icon, it is the same.

If, however, I extract the actual .ico file, glass it over, and upload it in my name with no credit to the original author, it is a very different proposition. I think that if one of us took some original icons from a local WC artist, glassed them over and uploaded them to Devart, the reaction would be much, much less 'grey'.

RE: Fords and GMs, I don't think I'll bugger off this time, thanks. The topic of the site is skinning, not fan art and icon 'porting', so the analogy isn't spot on. I have have ceased to care about Wincusto's policy, actually. When you try and justify the fairness of it, though, you inspire debate. Why bother? You don't have to justify it.

The best thing to do is just to state the policy and leave it at that. Then there can be no argument.


[Message Edited]

OK, Baker...consider it stated....

rather than from the source game image would be considered not 'OK'.

So If I take ss and wp from the source game then use it in my wb skin without permission, will my skin be accepted in WC?

"gonna go round in circles, gonna fly high like a bird up in the sky"

#59

And the wax on your wings will melt in the sun, Icarus!
Oh dear, oh dear...