Results 26 to 42 of 42
-
07-21-2005, 12:39 PM #26Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- NJ USA
- Posts
- 332
Originally posted by Pete
So in other words... no one knows for sure. Like most laws, it's up to the interpretation.
Here is what I found on designertoday website:
"The "look" and "feel" of the DesignerToday.com website also are GMP Services, Inc. trademarks/servicemarks. This includes DesignerToday color combinations, button shapes, layout, and all other graphical elements."
gee I hope no one needs to use a square aqua button with plain text. To me that "warning" is total BS.
(Equentity - Pauly: I didn't start this thread)
The DesignerToday copyright statement is correct whether yo think so or not. It's true that no one can copyright a shape or use of a font, and the buttons demonstrated on the site are very basic, but create a site with their individual elements in it and email it to them, see what happens.
I really wish some people would get out of the idea that since it's on the internet it's theirs to take.
-
07-21-2005, 12:49 PM #27Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Posts
- 50
This whole idea that designs have been copyrighted is really, at its core, rediculous.
If you put Copyright 2005 Company Name. All Rights Reserved. at the bottom of your site, this does not mean you have actually submitted a copyright request.
I understand that in today's world it is more about "who did it first". But in reality, copyrights are rarely submitted legally.
I understand the points that everyone is making. I am not in anyway suggesting that it is "OK" to copy anothers work.
I am merely playing devil's advocate here, defending the fact that layouts cannot be claimed by a single corporation or individual.
Take for example, 2advanced.com, they helped give flash a kickstart for web development. There work has been copied and applied in a million different projects. They came up with certain layouts that have been used by a ton of other designers. WebAgent007.com is the same, these guys do incredible work. Ofcourse, incredible things are going to be "copied" or applied to your own work, that is what makes this world competitive.
Everyone clones what works. Even in the automotive industry, the browser world, the brick and mortor book stores, movie theatres, etc... etc... etc...
Change it a little, slap your logo on it, and stick it in the market.
-
07-21-2005, 12:58 PM #28Retired Moderator
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- Pflugerville, TX
- Posts
- 11,231
If you put Copyright 2005 Company Name. All Rights Reserved. at the bottom of your site, this does not mean you have actually submitted a copyright request.
I understand that in today's world it is more about "who did it first". But in reality, copyrights are rarely submitted legally.
There's a lot of grey area when it comes to copyrights. There's no clear-cut standard for what makes a layout unique v. what makes it legally in violation. But OP asked if he could "clone" a layout, and the answer is no. It's no different than "cloning" a painting without the original artist's permission. You can't do it. You can be sued. You will lose. Given OP's original statements, this is cut-and-dry. Cloning = illegal. Period.Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design
-
07-21-2005, 01:00 PM #29Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- NJ USA
- Posts
- 332
Wrong again, TheBullet. Copyright is not the same as trademarked (which needs to be submited into the legal system). Once someone creates something that is their own, it is theirs. http://www.allworth.com/Articles/article06.htm
Read this as well: http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html
-
07-21-2005, 01:05 PM #30Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Posts
- 50
I have to disagree. But not entirely...
There are different methods of cloning...
1. Cloning - Taking an existing site, making a new one that looks EXACTLY the same as the original.
2. Cloning/MOD - Taking an existing site, making changes (colors, images, etc), content. Enough to make look "different".
I agree with you about option 1. Not option 2.
I think we might be going ROUND and ROUND on this one
-
07-21-2005, 01:09 PM #31Retired Moderator
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- Pflugerville, TX
- Posts
- 11,231
#1 - Clearly illegal
#2 - Grey area. Might be illegal, might not be. It's a judge's call. Certainly from another person in the industry, it is unethical. But that doesn't make it illegal.
FWIW, OP was talking about doing #1. Let's just make it very clear to him when he reads this thread that the scenario he described is wholely illegal.Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design
-
07-21-2005, 01:09 PM #32Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Posts
- 50
phos...
Wrong again? Didn't know I was ever wrong...
I will accept that putting "Copyright" on your work is considered "copyrighted". However my point was this:
I can create ANYTHING, and say it is copyrighted. Whether I do research to prove it is "original" or not. It's a simple point that people do not research their work before they quickly assign "Copyright" to it.
Which in MY OPINION, is rediculous.
-
07-21-2005, 01:11 PM #33Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Posts
- 50
Originally posted by the_pm
#1 - Clearly illegal
#2 - Grey area. Might be illegal, might not be. It's a judge's call. Certainly from another person in the industry, it is unethical. But that doesn't make it illegal.
FWIW, OP was talking about doing #1. Let's just make it very clear to him when he reads this thread that the scenario he described is wholely illegal.
#2... We could discuss for 2 years... and still be at the same place.
-
07-21-2005, 01:15 PM #34Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- NJ USA
- Posts
- 332
You are correct there, it is up to the creator to make something original. I've been guilty before of imitating something that I had seen before, though it was so far in the back of my mind I didn't realise it. Luckily it was for school and someone in my class pointed it out. Boy was I embarassed :p My point is that even if you do not realise that what you make is something already copyrighted, it doesn't excuse you from the law.
We are kind of going in circles here. PM summarised pretty well.
-
07-21-2005, 01:25 PM #35Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Posts
- 50
Virtual Hands Shakes for everyone!
Mod... Please close this thread.
-
07-23-2005, 07:45 PM #36Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Location
- Orlando Florida
- Posts
- 538
well to me....I feel it I take something that looks exactly like one site and make something to exact I feel as if I was coping the site and feel bad about it. Now I have had clients ask if I can make something look similar to a certian site...and I make it diffrent and unique but with teh same qualities of that site. Example... www.musicdrop.net (site I designed) looks similar but is still diffrent than http://www.musichypeonline.com/home.htm
-
07-26-2005, 03:05 PM #37Temporarily Suspended
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Posts
- 385
When it comes to cloning an entire site Its fairly obvious that its a violation of copyright. However I think some of the comments here just go too far. The layout on 90%+ of sites out there are the same.
Menu to the left, Horizontal navigation at the top, logo top left hand corner etc etc. Even some of the people in this thread claiming to design from scratch have the same styles in their portfolio. They are standard because they have all been copied
so often.
Moving to the graphics common to all sites and we see wholesale copying of the same styles - buttons with gradients and slight beveled edges, aqua and gel styles everywhere. They are similiar in a number of ways besides that as well.
Finally in regard to colors - Most good designs are based on Color Theory and there is no way that any company can lay claim to copyright of colors that work according to color theory.
We are all inspired by something in our life and in art thats how every artists learns. that involves reproduction of techniques and styles you've seen and liked. So no - don't clone. that doesn't take any creativity but there no ethical, moral or legal reason you can't use things you've learn't from other sites - just don't go looking to copy or lift the actual graphics or code.
-
07-27-2005, 01:21 AM #38WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Posts
- 142
Originally posted by The Bullet
Take for example, 2advanced.com, they helped give flash a kickstart for web development. There work has been copied and applied in a million different projects. They came up with certain layouts that have been used by a ton of other designers. WebAgent007.com is the same, these guys do incredible work. Ofcourse, incredible things are going to be "copied" or applied to your own work, that is what makes this world competitive.
You can find a longer article with some remarks from our COO Tony Novak at: http://forums.ultrashock.com/forums/...threadid=28887
The bottom line:
- Most people who copy DO use source and/or images
- Those that don't are still copying look-and-feel, which is still actionable under many circumstances ( see: http://www.ivanhoffman.com/feel.html )
-
07-27-2005, 07:13 AM #39Temporarily Suspended
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Posts
- 385
Thanks for the Hoffman article. Its very good. I think it lays down exactly what is copyrightable and what isn't.
I think cloners do themselves a disservice as well. Copying a site tends to make you miss the main question - Why does this design work? If you get that answer by taking the time to analyze it then you give yourself the tools to create your own designs that work just as well and without copying
-
07-27-2005, 07:38 AM #40Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- Woking, England
- Posts
- 1,401
COPYRIGHT covers actual things, NOT IDEAS!!
You should also note that copyright does not protect ideas. It protects the way the idea is expressed in a piece of work, but it does not protect the idea itself.
From this I would presume you can copy the site if you make it yourself as there will be differences. I still would recommend you use your imagination and come up with your own site, using multiple sites as insperation!!Web Handyman - Website and Internet Marketing Service
-
07-27-2005, 10:33 AM #41WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
- Location
- Canada
- Posts
- 137
This is a very simple answer guys.
If you have to think about it, then you already know the answer.
-
07-27-2005, 04:09 PM #42Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Posts
- 36
gregorys, thanks, you just gave me a headache. (english is not my primary language btw =P) if i have to think about it then i already know the answer? are you the oracle ? just kidding man
this was an interesting topic. helped alot especially for me as starting to sell my design services soon.
- Theowww.Theodea.com - Defiant to Boundaries
aim: aimtheodea icq: 280307610 | msn / email: info[at]theodea.com