Bootskins?
Wednesday, January 12, 2005 by Essencay | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
The bootskin library is bloated with crap and images that violate copyright IMHO!
Is this art?
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2213&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2212&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2211&LibID=32
Do these violate copyright...there are lots of images from gameloading screens, dvd covers scans, movie image screencaptures, copyrighted cartoon characters, etc?
https://www.wincustomize.com/viewskin.aspx?LibID=32&SkinID=1942
https://www.wincustomize.com/viewskin.aspx?LibID=32&SkinID=1930
https://www.wincustomize.com/viewskin.aspx?LibID=32&SkinID=1870
There are some really nice and outstanding bootskins out there that are original work.
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2203&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=249&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=1883&LibID=32
Why does this stuff exist here? This isn't a case of new skinners creating a skin for the first time that needs some work because they're new at it.
Is this art?
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2213&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2212&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2211&LibID=32
Do these violate copyright...there are lots of images from gameloading screens, dvd covers scans, movie image screencaptures, copyrighted cartoon characters, etc?
https://www.wincustomize.com/viewskin.aspx?LibID=32&SkinID=1942
https://www.wincustomize.com/viewskin.aspx?LibID=32&SkinID=1930
https://www.wincustomize.com/viewskin.aspx?LibID=32&SkinID=1870
There are some really nice and outstanding bootskins out there that are original work.
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2203&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=249&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=1883&LibID=32
Why does this stuff exist here? This isn't a case of new skinners creating a skin for the first time that needs some work because they're new at it.
 |
|
Page 1 of 2 | |
|
|---|
NightTrainthedark
Reply #2 Wednesday, January 12, 2005 6:05 PM
Reply #2 Wednesday, January 12, 2005 6:05 PM
I can't agree with you more Essencay. 
Sleeping Dragon
Reply #3 Wednesday, January 12, 2005 6:37 PM
Reply #3 Wednesday, January 12, 2005 6:37 PM
I was told that most images of games, movies, celebrities would not be accepted. I believe the topic was wallpapers or obscured screenshots, but what's the difference?
GreatSilverWyrm
Reply #4 Wednesday, January 12, 2005 10:24 PM
Reply #4 Wednesday, January 12, 2005 10:24 PM
I can't agree with you more, Night Train...
Jafo
Reply #6 Thursday, January 13, 2005 1:32 AM
Reply #6 Thursday, January 13, 2005 1:32 AM
'Fan Art' is the phrase. [kona0197 is correct]...
The only one I have an issue with is the Apple Logo which has been of contention in the past.
AJCrowley
Reply #7 Thursday, January 13, 2005 1:52 AM
Reply #7 Thursday, January 13, 2005 1:52 AM
I think you're being too cynical. Quite frankly, I don't care how many downloads I have, and I can't see why any of these people would, especially given that the nature of their work is unlikely to get them "promoted" in their user rank.
It's been a while since I submitted anything, and it may have changed since then, but it was my understanding that anything submitted by anyone lower than the rank of Journeyman had to be approved by a moderator before appearing on the site. Secondary to this, I believe that there's a system where you can hide pieces that fail to acheive a minimum rating, which is a category that I'm sure many of these would fall into.
The simple truth is that I don't like 98% of the work I see on this, or any other, site. I know how much hard work goes into it, and I appreciate the effort that people put into the community, but only about 2% of it would ever be considered for a temporary spot on my desktop. It's the same on any skinning site, to get to the gems, you have to first sift through a mountain of crap (and I use the term loosely, I don't wish to insult anybody's efforts); this is and has always been the way of things. I can't help but wonder if this topic is more inspired by political sentiment than anything else, and if that is the case, in my opinion, while you're welcome to say whatever you wish, it would be wrong to have work removed from the site simply because it expresses a political view that you don't agree with (and if it's just that you don't like Bush being made fun of, I think you fall into a vast vast minority
).
The bottom line for me is that no matter what, you'll end up having to look through a lot of things you don't like to find anything that you do like. It's the job of the moderators to filter out content deemed inappropriate before it's seen in the download sections, and if you agree with the outcomes of the rating system as a whole, it's up to you to set your preferences to filter out pieces that receive a low rating. If copyright is an issue, and ironically, the piece on which it is most likely to be is one of the examples provided of "original and creative" work, then you can bet that Stardock will receive a letter or an email from the copyright holders asking for the content to be removed. At that point, due to the fact that very few pieces on this site are worth a several hundred thousand dollar lawsuit, it's probable that the piece will be removed - no harm done.
Let me know if I'm wrong in my assumptions here,
AJC
It's been a while since I submitted anything, and it may have changed since then, but it was my understanding that anything submitted by anyone lower than the rank of Journeyman had to be approved by a moderator before appearing on the site. Secondary to this, I believe that there's a system where you can hide pieces that fail to acheive a minimum rating, which is a category that I'm sure many of these would fall into.
The simple truth is that I don't like 98% of the work I see on this, or any other, site. I know how much hard work goes into it, and I appreciate the effort that people put into the community, but only about 2% of it would ever be considered for a temporary spot on my desktop. It's the same on any skinning site, to get to the gems, you have to first sift through a mountain of crap (and I use the term loosely, I don't wish to insult anybody's efforts); this is and has always been the way of things. I can't help but wonder if this topic is more inspired by political sentiment than anything else, and if that is the case, in my opinion, while you're welcome to say whatever you wish, it would be wrong to have work removed from the site simply because it expresses a political view that you don't agree with (and if it's just that you don't like Bush being made fun of, I think you fall into a vast vast minority
).The bottom line for me is that no matter what, you'll end up having to look through a lot of things you don't like to find anything that you do like. It's the job of the moderators to filter out content deemed inappropriate before it's seen in the download sections, and if you agree with the outcomes of the rating system as a whole, it's up to you to set your preferences to filter out pieces that receive a low rating. If copyright is an issue, and ironically, the piece on which it is most likely to be is one of the examples provided of "original and creative" work, then you can bet that Stardock will receive a letter or an email from the copyright holders asking for the content to be removed. At that point, due to the fact that very few pieces on this site are worth a several hundred thousand dollar lawsuit, it's probable that the piece will be removed - no harm done.
Let me know if I'm wrong in my assumptions here,
AJC
Essencay
Reply #8 Thursday, January 13, 2005 2:34 AM
Downloads? did anyone say anything about downloads? This isn't about downloads. I will agree with you about the wading through crap to find the gems. I think of bootskins and logons in the same fashion as I do of wallpaper. They're all basically screen images, just that the wall tends to hang around a bit longer that the other two. I don't believe that any of the ones I used for examples would make it through wallpaper moderation. Oh and I am a conservative who voted for Bush. I actually found the bootskins quite amusing, it's called political satire
I thought "FanArt" still needed to be an original creation. You don't just go and cut-n-paste willy nilly anything you please, convert it to 4bit and tada....bootskin. So basically then "FanArt" is instead anything under the sun that a copyright holder hasn't cried foul about? Let me clarify "anything under the sun" to mean something that would be a general public association with an individual, item or company and not just converting someone else's work....someone could not upload a photograph or wallpaper of Britney for example converted from one format to another and calling it "FanArt", but someone could upload a series of bootskins called the many moods of Britney and her flying dolphins, provided they created the images themselves. Created being used very loosely here, meaning that a screen capture from a Britney video would constitute a "created" work vs. using a photo found on the net.
Reply #8 Thursday, January 13, 2005 2:34 AM
| I think you're being too cynical. Quite frankly, I don't care how many downloads I have, and I can't see why any of these people would, especially given that the nature of their work is unlikely to get them "promoted" in their user rank. |
Downloads? did anyone say anything about downloads? This isn't about downloads. I will agree with you about the wading through crap to find the gems. I think of bootskins and logons in the same fashion as I do of wallpaper. They're all basically screen images, just that the wall tends to hang around a bit longer that the other two. I don't believe that any of the ones I used for examples would make it through wallpaper moderation. Oh and I am a conservative who voted for Bush. I actually found the bootskins quite amusing, it's called political satire
I thought "FanArt" still needed to be an original creation. You don't just go and cut-n-paste willy nilly anything you please, convert it to 4bit and tada....bootskin. So basically then "FanArt" is instead anything under the sun that a copyright holder hasn't cried foul about? Let me clarify "anything under the sun" to mean something that would be a general public association with an individual, item or company and not just converting someone else's work....someone could not upload a photograph or wallpaper of Britney for example converted from one format to another and calling it "FanArt", but someone could upload a series of bootskins called the many moods of Britney and her flying dolphins, provided they created the images themselves. Created being used very loosely here, meaning that a screen capture from a Britney video would constitute a "created" work vs. using a photo found on the net.
Jaybeats
Reply #9 Thursday, January 13, 2005 3:01 AM
Reply #9 Thursday, January 13, 2005 3:01 AM
La La La La Hoody Hoooooooo! (notice I'm not caring about the subject)
kona0197
Reply #10 Thursday, January 13, 2005 3:45 AM
Reply #10 Thursday, January 13, 2005 3:45 AM
Essencay - Ask Frogboy what he means by "Fan art" or ask Jafo. I can't find it now but Frogboy wrote a artictle explaing we could use Copyrighted stuff for "fan art" if I remember right. Pretty sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, no worries.
horiz0n
Reply #12 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:02 AM
Reply #12 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:02 AM
rips are rips *shrug* fan art implies the "fan" actually had the talent to and further more DID make the "art"
this is just random crap people think is cool and toss it on here, pictures from games, stupid parody images that flood your junkmail, it seems to me that people see stuff (real work) and want to do it too, and for some reason expect us to be stupid enough to think that you taking an imagine and posting it here means you did it or that you have any talent. It's simple really, not everyone can skin or be artists, and if you want to do it, then DO IT, and if you can't do it, stop pretending you can and just enjoy it. For example I love movies, movies are good. However, I'm not Peter Jackson, and cannot make movies, so instead of being full of crap and saying I can or do, I JUST STFU AND WATCH MOVIES AND ENJOY IT.
I'm not trying to stamp on anyone about what they can do or how good they can do it, but this is madness, as if wallpapers and object dock wasn't bad enough with ripping, it seems bootskins have become the safehaven of rippers.
this is just random crap people think is cool and toss it on here, pictures from games, stupid parody images that flood your junkmail, it seems to me that people see stuff (real work) and want to do it too, and for some reason expect us to be stupid enough to think that you taking an imagine and posting it here means you did it or that you have any talent. It's simple really, not everyone can skin or be artists, and if you want to do it, then DO IT, and if you can't do it, stop pretending you can and just enjoy it. For example I love movies, movies are good. However, I'm not Peter Jackson, and cannot make movies, so instead of being full of crap and saying I can or do, I JUST STFU AND WATCH MOVIES AND ENJOY IT.
I'm not trying to stamp on anyone about what they can do or how good they can do it, but this is madness, as if wallpapers and object dock wasn't bad enough with ripping, it seems bootskins have become the safehaven of rippers.
tecitup
Reply #13 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:02 AM
Reply #13 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:02 AM
can someone tell me why my bootskin program is asking for a .bootskin but every file i download is
.bmp
.jpg
and
.ini
.bmp
.jpg
and
.ini
Matchbook
Reply #14 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:03 AM
I thought so, too actually. Hm. My case in point is my soon-to-be-released car "logo" wallpaper pack. I asked an admin if it was ok to upload [before I actually upload it] and as long as I made each of these logos [and all graphics contained within the wallpaper] it was ok. It was then, fan-art. *shrugs*.
Reply #14 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:03 AM
| I thought "FanArt" still needed to be an original creation |
I thought so, too actually. Hm. My case in point is my soon-to-be-released car "logo" wallpaper pack. I asked an admin if it was ok to upload [before I actually upload it] and as long as I made each of these logos [and all graphics contained within the wallpaper] it was ok. It was then, fan-art. *shrugs*.
kona0197
Reply #15 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:05 AM
Reply #15 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:05 AM
Don't unzip them. first download the bootskin program at www.bootskin.net then double click the boot you downloaded. Should install automatically.
horiz0n
Reply #16 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:05 AM
Reply #16 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:05 AM
and what exactly is with the apple logo? these guys blatently rip work and get put into fan art catagory, but people who actually MAKE their own version of the apple logo are bad?
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2203&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/viewskin.aspx?LibID=32&SkinID=1870
seriously now, compare these two, how can one be fan art or in plainer terms a rip, and the other be completely original work yet contentuous?
https://www.wincustomize.com/ViewSkin.aspx?SkinID=2203&LibID=32
https://www.wincustomize.com/viewskin.aspx?LibID=32&SkinID=1870
seriously now, compare these two, how can one be fan art or in plainer terms a rip, and the other be completely original work yet contentuous?
tecitup
Reply #17 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:06 AM
Reply #17 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:06 AM
i downloaded the program, and i have the zip files. how do I put them together they still open as zip
tecitup
Reply #18 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:09 AM
Reply #18 Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:09 AM
ok nvm i found it, i had to extract that one folder to "skins" in c: drive
Jafo
Reply #19 Thursday, January 13, 2005 6:34 AM
Reply #19 Thursday, January 13, 2005 6:34 AM
horiz0n....both of those images you link to are argued as 'fan-art' and the equivalent is found on every 'graphic' site on the planet.
One saving grace here is that rating filters 'may' limit public exposure to what you appear to think is less than good.
The reason the Apple logo is more of an issue than the Zelda fan-art? Ask Apple...they will be quite happy to explain. Frankly I don't need to do so FOR them.
AJCrowley
Reply #20 Thursday, January 13, 2005 7:15 AM
Reply #20 Thursday, January 13, 2005 7:15 AM
Hey Essencay,
A conservative who voted for Bush, isn't that a bit contradictory? I thought conservatives believed in minimal powers for the federal government, and fiscal responsibility (or conservatism). Politics and joking aside, it occured to me that the subject matter might be the source of your dismay rather than "skin spamming" in general because of the examples that you provided, I apologize if I came to the wrong conclusion.
The comment about downloads was not directed at you, it was directed at one of the people who replied, and made the claim that these were posted by people who just wanted to accumulate downloads, which, while I cannot say with certainty that they are incorrect, I cannot see the logic in posting something solely for the purpose of accumulating downloads.
I do agree with the basis of your argument, however, there is more (however little) to creating a bootskin or login screen, and some people may just not be willing to give it a try. The solution that I would propose to the perceived problem, rather than simply disallowing anything that is not "original artwork", is to categorize the relevant sections into original artwork and rehashes of existing material. That said, there are limits in my mind on what is acceptable - there is a difference in my mind between going to DeviantArt and downloading a nice wallpaper that someone worked hard on making, converting it to a bootscreen and slapping your own name on it, and creating a bootscreen from a more "mainstream" poster type image, whether it be of a sweaty Britney Spears, or the newest publicity hungry wallpaper from Apple, though there is room for debate on the matter of what is fair game for plagiarism, and indeed, what actually consistutes plagiarism. The answer to that question for me is fairly simple - if it's the work of a private author, then it's not fair game, if it's an image done for publicity purposes, whether it be of latest ill conceived teenage role model Paris Hilton, who was described to a tee in a recent episode of South Park (though I doubt that some of the more malicious words for stupid spoiled lady of ill repute would be happily received on this forum), or a picture of the latest fantastic plastic Mac on a white background, then it's fair game. My reasoning is also simple, the "publicity" images were created solely for the purpose of generating publicity, so turning them into various types of skins is doing nothing other than furthering the goals of the owners. Of course, that's a debate that's been had here many times before, and could go on for a very long time...
Cheers,
AJ
A conservative who voted for Bush, isn't that a bit contradictory? I thought conservatives believed in minimal powers for the federal government, and fiscal responsibility (or conservatism). Politics and joking aside, it occured to me that the subject matter might be the source of your dismay rather than "skin spamming" in general because of the examples that you provided, I apologize if I came to the wrong conclusion.
The comment about downloads was not directed at you, it was directed at one of the people who replied, and made the claim that these were posted by people who just wanted to accumulate downloads, which, while I cannot say with certainty that they are incorrect, I cannot see the logic in posting something solely for the purpose of accumulating downloads.
I do agree with the basis of your argument, however, there is more (however little) to creating a bootskin or login screen, and some people may just not be willing to give it a try. The solution that I would propose to the perceived problem, rather than simply disallowing anything that is not "original artwork", is to categorize the relevant sections into original artwork and rehashes of existing material. That said, there are limits in my mind on what is acceptable - there is a difference in my mind between going to DeviantArt and downloading a nice wallpaper that someone worked hard on making, converting it to a bootscreen and slapping your own name on it, and creating a bootscreen from a more "mainstream" poster type image, whether it be of a sweaty Britney Spears, or the newest publicity hungry wallpaper from Apple, though there is room for debate on the matter of what is fair game for plagiarism, and indeed, what actually consistutes plagiarism. The answer to that question for me is fairly simple - if it's the work of a private author, then it's not fair game, if it's an image done for publicity purposes, whether it be of latest ill conceived teenage role model Paris Hilton, who was described to a tee in a recent episode of South Park (though I doubt that some of the more malicious words for stupid spoiled lady of ill repute would be happily received on this forum), or a picture of the latest fantastic plastic Mac on a white background, then it's fair game. My reasoning is also simple, the "publicity" images were created solely for the purpose of generating publicity, so turning them into various types of skins is doing nothing other than furthering the goals of the owners. Of course, that's a debate that's been had here many times before, and could go on for a very long time...
Cheers,
AJ
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 Wednesday, January 12, 2005 5:17 PM