Is this considered to be a rip?
Monday, October 3, 2005 by Cyberworld | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Okay i spent some days now trying to make a nice wallpapers package to complement TSF's great work Alienware Invader.It has 44 walls in total at all possible resolutions (even wide and double screens). I've uploaded it and it got rejected. I've sent mail but got no response,sooo i'm leaving it to public judgement. Is this considered a rip or not? Here's a link of one of the walls (there are four designs). Link: Link
Please do keep in mind that i made all graphics in Photoshop,no copy-paste here,all were redrawned. And trust me space scenes take time to make.
Thank you fro your response.
Please do keep in mind that i made all graphics in Photoshop,no copy-paste here,all were redrawned. And trust me space scenes take time to make.
Thank you fro your response.
 |
|
Page 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
TheSkinsFactory
Reply #22 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:24 AM
Reply #22 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:24 AM
And "get my drift" is no different than saying "do you understand" just more colorful.
CerebroJD
Reply #23 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:04 AM
Reply #23 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:04 AM
Jeff, are you out of your mind? That wall in no way is any sort of rip or intellectual 'theft' of yours.
If you're willing to take that on as a rip, then take me on next. I released that less than a week after your last suite, I believe. Please, lets discuss the limits of intellectual property, since tit was in progress when you released yours. I just changed the highight to blue after you released Invader. My personal opinion says that I should be able to make that choice should I so chose, and if people download it since it matches your suite, then so be it. Thats just the way things go, sometimes. I doubt I'm stealing downloads from you, and its my own work, from scratch.
My personal opinion on those walls is that they should be allowed in.
If you're willing to take that on as a rip, then take me on next. I released that less than a week after your last suite, I believe. Please, lets discuss the limits of intellectual property, since tit was in progress when you released yours. I just changed the highight to blue after you released Invader. My personal opinion says that I should be able to make that choice should I so chose, and if people download it since it matches your suite, then so be it. Thats just the way things go, sometimes. I doubt I'm stealing downloads from you, and its my own work, from scratch.
My personal opinion on those walls is that they should be allowed in.
Cyberworld
Reply #24 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 1:12 PM
I'll try to cut down on sizes and re-upload Fairyy~,thank you everyone for the support and the helpful comments. I'll be uploading it soon,as is with no decorative bars...
TSF,no harm done,thank you for your input...
Reply #24 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 1:12 PM
| So size of d/load was not the factor..but, keep in mind..for me most wall downloads take 12 to 20 minutes if too many sizes are in Zip. |
I'll try to cut down on sizes and re-upload Fairyy~,thank you everyone for the support and the helpful comments.
I'll be uploading it soon,as is with no decorative bars...TSF,no harm done,thank you for your input...
eieio
Reply #25 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 4:15 PM
Reply #25 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 4:15 PM
If all the work is yours, no, it is not a rip. If it strongly resembles something someone else has done, strictly speaking it is not a rip, could possibly be considered fan art, most probably considered gauche, depending on the artist you emulated.
If your works are similar to some readily available commercial work, such as Star Wars, etc, WC will probably have no problem with it. If it is a known skinner whose works you have 'copied', you may have a bit of an issue. A little tact would be in order. See Sleeping Dragon's post above for an example.
Of course the issue of whether your work is good enough for WC is a completely different issue.
If your works are similar to some readily available commercial work, such as Star Wars, etc, WC will probably have no problem with it. If it is a known skinner whose works you have 'copied', you may have a bit of an issue. A little tact would be in order. See Sleeping Dragon's post above for an example.
Of course the issue of whether your work is good enough for WC is a completely different issue.
TheSkinsFactory
Reply #26 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 4:32 PM
CerebroJD: I didn't say the wall is a rip. I said the blue lights are. So it's not a matter if i'm out of my mind but whether or not
you know how to read. Who said anything about stealing downloads? And why are you even involved in this? It was settled prior
to you opening your mouth.
Reply #26 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 4:32 PM
| Jeff, are you out of your mind? That wall in no way is any sort of rip or intellectual 'theft' of yours. |
CerebroJD: I didn't say the wall is a rip. I said the blue lights are. So it's not a matter if i'm out of my mind but whether or not
you know how to read. Who said anything about stealing downloads? And why are you even involved in this? It was settled prior
to you opening your mouth.
TheSkinsFactory
Reply #27 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 4:40 PM
Reply #27 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 4:40 PM
CerebroJD: I didn't bring this up in the first place so wtf are you jumping down my throat? Go do your homework...
CerebroJD
Reply #28 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 4:48 PM
Reply #28 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 4:48 PM
So, your opinion is that glowy blue bars are infringing? I find that... amusing...
I wonder... how does one establish that generalized appearances like "blue lights" are 'owned' by someone? It sounds almost like a trademark, but not...
I wonder... how does one establish that generalized appearances like "blue lights" are 'owned' by someone? It sounds almost like a trademark, but not...
TheSkinsFactory
Reply #29 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 5:01 PM
Reply #29 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 5:01 PM
i'm not going to sit here arguing with a teenager. have a good night.
TheSkinsFactory
Reply #30 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 5:19 PM
Reply #30 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 5:19 PM
And so that you may learn something: "Trademark infringement depends on the likelihood that there will be confusion in the marketplace."
The way our client's logo looks/skins and the way his lights look are almost identical. The users could be deceived
that his wallpaper (when using the lights which are almost exactly like the artwork we created) was an official
release. If his work is not as good as what we released it could damage our reputation and our client's. Personally
i could care less. I asked him to remove it and he is so whatever. If he told me no, maybe i would tell a moderator
and maybe i wouldn't. I don't care all that much. I didn't start this thread. I think he should release it but he should out of respect remove the lights which are almost identical to what we did so there is no confusion.
The way our client's logo looks/skins and the way his lights look are almost identical. The users could be deceived
that his wallpaper (when using the lights which are almost exactly like the artwork we created) was an official
release. If his work is not as good as what we released it could damage our reputation and our client's. Personally
i could care less. I asked him to remove it and he is so whatever. If he told me no, maybe i would tell a moderator
and maybe i wouldn't. I don't care all that much. I didn't start this thread. I think he should release it but he should out of respect remove the lights which are almost identical to what we did so there is no confusion.
Cyberworld
Reply #31 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 3:07 AM
Reply #31 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 3:07 AM
Will a mod please lock this thread before it gets ugly? The matter has been already been settled. Thank you.
horizon
Reply #32 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 4:36 AM
In reply to that, of course 640x480 is nearly all but dead, anyone that has a machine running that still runs that size probably doesn't care much about changing the wall in the first place. But for 800x600 and I did list those all to be common, since it didn't seem to quite click the first time, I just said (for the 3rd time now not that I'm counting)
"800x600 is common" so don't get me wrong when I said it is fading away. As things progress those smaller resolutions start to die out in favor of larger ones for many reasons. People in web want to be able to push things further than being restricted to basically 760x420, things such as movies are available in higher resolution, people just might want a cleaner higher res, or get tired of the gameboy pixel effect of a low resolution, and the fact that people aren't so commonly using 13-14 inch monitors anymore. If you liked 800x600 on a 15 inch, go to using a 17 inch and 1024x768 will have basically the same feel with more real estate on the screen. 1024x768 is pretty much the standard size resolution now, but it'll take forever to really be able to make webcontent for that size, in plenty of cases designers still have to make sites smaller than 640.
But for me, I just don't like a start button that's 3 inches wide and being able to count each pixel from 3 feet away. But to each their own.
widescreen and dual monitor however are definitely not common, widescreen starting to become a significant exception though, especially with macs. And since there really isn't too much of a predetermined "right" size to toss a widescreen into a zip, since there seem to be so many different widescreen monitors, putting in a 1920x1200 like tsf mentioned basically covers all those bases in general.
Reply #32 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 4:36 AM
| Sorry - but I use 800x600 and it is still quite common. |
| Outdated? I'm still using an 800x600 monitor and forcing myself to adjust to 1024x768 resolution. Just how big do people need their monitors? The size of the entire desk? It's not a television. |
In reply to that, of course 640x480 is nearly all but dead, anyone that has a machine running that still runs that size probably doesn't care much about changing the wall in the first place. But for 800x600 and I did list those all to be common, since it didn't seem to quite click the first time, I just said (for the 3rd time now not that I'm counting)
"800x600 is common" so don't get me wrong when I said it is fading away. As things progress those smaller resolutions start to die out in favor of larger ones for many reasons. People in web want to be able to push things further than being restricted to basically 760x420, things such as movies are available in higher resolution, people just might want a cleaner higher res, or get tired of the gameboy pixel effect of a low resolution, and the fact that people aren't so commonly using 13-14 inch monitors anymore. If you liked 800x600 on a 15 inch, go to using a 17 inch and 1024x768 will have basically the same feel with more real estate on the screen. 1024x768 is pretty much the standard size resolution now, but it'll take forever to really be able to make webcontent for that size, in plenty of cases designers still have to make sites smaller than 640.But for me, I just don't like a start button that's 3 inches wide and being able to count each pixel from 3 feet away. But to each their own.
widescreen and dual monitor however are definitely not common, widescreen starting to become a significant exception though, especially with macs. And since there really isn't too much of a predetermined "right" size to toss a widescreen into a zip, since there seem to be so many different widescreen monitors, putting in a 1920x1200 like tsf mentioned basically covers all those bases in general.
BX
Reply #33 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 4:47 AM
So according TSF definition, All half mid blue, half dark blue enligtened bars would be the property of their customer i.e.Alienware .... and use of such bars elsewhere could harm and destroy their reputation !!!!!!
For me it is joke of the century ....
Reply #33 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 4:47 AM
| The way our client's logo looks/skins and the way his lights look are almost identical. The users could be deceived that his wallpaper (when using the lights which are almost exactly like the artwork we created) was an official release. If his work is not as good as what we released it could damage our reputation and our client's. |
So according TSF definition, All half mid blue, half dark blue enligtened bars would be the property of their customer i.e.Alienware .... and use of such bars elsewhere could harm and destroy their reputation !!!!!!
For me it is joke of the century ....
TheSkinsFactory
Reply #34 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 8:00 AM
Reply #34 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 8:00 AM
It was used as an example to explain how trademarks work.
Cyberworld
Reply #35 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 9:18 AM
Reply #35 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 9:18 AM
I've uploaded a second edition of the wall...so no harm done,just removed the damned bars and used some more brushes...
NightTrainthedark
Reply #36 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 10:28 AM
Actually there is harm done. You made a wallpaper and submitted it. It was rejected for whatever reasons. You now went and altered it from the original wallpaper. Now the wallpaper is something you altered just to get it uploaded. My question is...Are you happy with it or are you settling just to get it uploaded? If yes, then the original wallpaper didn't mean squat to you. I am not trying to piss you off, just making sure your work isn't compromised based on downloads or sharing. I see, "just removing the bars and used some more brushes" as careless. I hope you understand my point, Im tired today from struggling all night with WB 5.
Don't compromise your work because someone complained about a color. If you were happy with the first result, go with it. Compromising art is a sin.
Reply #36 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 10:28 AM
| I've uploaded a second edition of the wall...so no harm done,just removed the damned bars and used some more brushes... |
Actually there is harm done. You made a wallpaper and submitted it. It was rejected for whatever reasons. You now went and altered it from the original wallpaper. Now the wallpaper is something you altered just to get it uploaded. My question is...Are you happy with it or are you settling just to get it uploaded? If yes, then the original wallpaper didn't mean squat to you. I am not trying to piss you off, just making sure your work isn't compromised based on downloads or sharing. I see, "just removing the bars and used some more brushes" as careless. I hope you understand my point, Im tired today from struggling all night with WB 5.
Don't compromise your work because someone complained about a color. If you were happy with the first result, go with it. Compromising art is a sin.
TheSkinsFactory
Reply #37 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 10:56 AM
Reply #37 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 10:56 AM
It wasn't rejected because of the blue bars. And its not compromising not to use someone else's art. And obviously it was rejected for other reasons so how is he supposed to "go with it"?
"compromising art is a sin": you will never make it in commercial art with that philosphy. Hope you have a non-artistic career in which to pay your bills.
"compromising art is a sin": you will never make it in commercial art with that philosphy. Hope you have a non-artistic career in which to pay your bills.
NightTrainthedark
Reply #38 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 11:08 AM
No, it is compromising to his art. Why does everything have to be about you TSF?
Reply #38 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 11:08 AM
| And its not compromising not to use someone else's art |
No, it is compromising to his art. Why does everything have to be about you TSF?
Sleeping Dragon
Reply #39 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 11:15 AM
Commercial art is a type of art, but not all art is commercial. Kind of an important clarification.
Reply #39 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 11:15 AM
| "compromising art is a sin": you will never make it in commercial art with that philosphy. Hope you have a non-artistic career in which to pay your bills. |
Commercial art is a type of art, but not all art is commercial. Kind of an important clarification.
Cyberworld
Reply #40 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 11:44 AM
NT i've been here for nearly four years as a member. I never aim to get more downloads. I don't do commercial works and surely i'm not trying to make it big on score boards. Also i'm not into arguing. I'm a simple amateur user and i just love to try and create on PC, cause i can't do it by hand. I'm not a commercial skinner,nor do i have to make a living out of this. It's not my life,it's my hobby.
The edition i've uploaded is a revised one,which i hope you like better. I've also removed the bars cause in this edition the bars just don't fit in to the whole of the picture. The first edition propably wouldn't make it anyway due to the fact that it works as a compliment to a skin,which in retrospect isn't of equal quality as the rest of the skin. I'm happier with this version cause it is just better and works as a stand-alone work.
You didn't piss me off. Ya all guys are making a big matter out of nothing. Sorry if my previous statement seems as careless,it really isn't. It was meant as informative,not as a letting go and creating something else instead.
I was happy,but unfortunatelly it got rejected. The reason why has not yet been explained by someone in authority,so i can't speak,not can i complain. What if it was considered of low quality or as Jafo said the size was just too big for just one work? I'm not complaining here,i was just curious as to the reasons of rejection and if it had anything to do with copyrights. And surely i got more than one opinions on the subject,which lead me to conclude that it isn't much of a copyright issue. Anw with the new edition i'm happier.
I second this.
Did you ever had to? If you found that one of your skins was very similar to something created by someone else would you compromise your art? Hypothetically speaking would you compromise your art? As for me i'd never compromise,if legal issues are aroused i'd just keep my art to myself and for the ones who'd like to see it.
Reply #40 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 11:44 AM
| Now the wallpaper is something you altered just to get it uploaded. |
NT i've been here for nearly four years as a member. I never aim to get more downloads. I don't do commercial works and surely i'm not trying to make it big on score boards. Also i'm not into arguing. I'm a simple amateur user and i just love to try and create on PC, cause i can't do it by hand. I'm not a commercial skinner,nor do i have to make a living out of this. It's not my life,it's my hobby.
| Are you happy with it or are you settling just to get it uploaded? |
The edition i've uploaded is a revised one,which i hope you like better. I've also removed the bars cause in this edition the bars just don't fit in to the whole of the picture.
The first edition propably wouldn't make it anyway due to the fact that it works as a compliment to a skin,which in retrospect isn't of equal quality as the rest of the skin. I'm happier with this version cause it is just better and works as a stand-alone work. | I am not trying to piss you off, just making sure your work isn't compromised based on downloads or sharing. I see, "just removing the bars and used some more brushes" as careless. |
You didn't piss me off. Ya all guys are making a big matter out of nothing. Sorry if my previous statement seems as careless,it really isn't. It was meant as informative,not as a letting go and creating something else instead.
| If you were happy with the first result, go with it. |
I was happy,but unfortunatelly it got rejected. The reason why has not yet been explained by someone in authority,so i can't speak,not can i complain. What if it was considered of low quality or as Jafo said the size was just too big for just one work? I'm not complaining here,i was just curious as to the reasons of rejection and if it had anything to do with copyrights. And surely i got more than one opinions on the subject,which lead me to conclude that it isn't much of a copyright issue. Anw with the new edition i'm happier.
| Compromising art is a sin. |
I second this. | "compromising art is a sin": you will never make it in commercial art with that philosphy. Hope you have a non-artistic career in which to pay your bills. |
Did you ever had to? If you found that one of your skins was very similar to something created by someone else would you compromise your art? Hypothetically speaking would you compromise your art? As for me i'd never compromise,if legal issues are aroused i'd just keep my art to myself and for the ones who'd like to see it.
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 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
Reply #21 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:24 AM
I always include 1920 x 1200.
Cyberworld: i misread what you wrote. I thought you meant you sent me an email and i didn't answer it considering the title of this forum post was "is this a rip". Just remove the blue bars and upload it. Stupid to spend all that time on something and not release it.