Originally posted by Problem_Child
,MEANING I TOOKI THEM TO BMP AND ADDED TEXT WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN YOU MAKE A SIG? YOU TAKE A PIC AND YOU STRETCH IT OUT AND ADD TEXT IS THAT NOT ALSO COPYRIGHTING?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
None of that makes sense. 13
A good sigmaker will use a picture that is not copyrighted, so no, there would be no copyright infringement. Shock.
Originally posted by DarkC
Personally I don't blame them but I don't find it necessary to copyright something like that.I see you're not attacking my using the Calgary Flames logo in my signature though.
Artwork is copyrighted to the creator, and personal artwork that is not said to be allowed to be used cannot be used. You can bet that if I found someone here using MY art without first getting my permission that I'd raise hell about it. ALL art is copyrighted the moment it is made.
And if you were told by the owner of the Calgary Flames that you couldn't use their logo, would you remove it? Because legally, you would have to.
Originally posted by Lana
Artwork is copyrighted to the creator, and personal artwork that is not said to be allowed to be used cannot be used. You can bet that if I found someone here using MY art without first getting my permission that I'd raise hell about it. ALL art is copyrighted the moment it is made.And if you were told by the owner of the Calgary Flames that you couldn't use their logo, would you remove it? Because legally, you would have to.
I got permission from www.IMDB.com for the pic in my sig if that matters 😕
Originally posted by Eclipso
I got permission from www.IMDB.com for the pic in my sig if that matters 😕
Liar. *calls police*
Originally posted by Lana
Artwork is copyrighted to the creator, and personal artwork that is not said to be allowed to be used cannot be used. You can bet that if I found someone here using MY art without first getting my permission that I'd raise hell about it. ALL art is copyrighted the moment it is made.And if you were told by the owner of the Calgary Flames that you couldn't use their logo, would you remove it? Because legally, you would have to.
Sure, after he got to about a million other people and tracked down just about everyone on the Flames message board.
Any man with that kind of patience deserves to be respected.
Originally posted by DarkC
Well, that's the trouble with internet galleries, isn't it?Sure, after he got to about a million other people and tracked down just about everyone on the Flames message board.
Any man with that kind of patience deserves to be respected.
Just because something is online does not mean you have permission to use it. I have no idea where that attitude or idea comes from, but the internet is NOT public domain.
And no, if you were asked, you would have to remove it immediately. Doesn't matter if he's tracked down everyone - or even ANYONE - else using it and asked them to stop.
Originally posted by Lana
Just because something is online does not mean you have permission to use it. I have no idea where that attitude or idea comes from, but the internet is NOT public domain.And no, if you were asked, you would have to remove it immediately. Doesn't matter if he's tracked down everyone - or even ANYONE - else using it and asked them to stop.
...did you not see me say "Sure"?
Originally posted by DarkC
Internet is public domain. If you really want it to be more private, you'd protect your work with a password only available to those you choose to let know....did you not see me say "Sure"?
No. The internet is not public domain. People should be able to show off their work without fear of it being taken and used without their permission. Something is only considered public domain if the copyright on it has expired.
You said "sure, after he told everyone else to take it down" (paraphrasing). Doesn't work that way.
Originally posted by Lana
No. The internet is not public domain. People should be able to show off their work without fear of it being taken and used without their permission. Something is only considered public domain if the copyright on it has expired.You said "sure, after he told everyone else to take it down" (paraphrasing). Doesn't work that way.
Proof? We're sitting here at KMC talking about it. Everyday consumers, like you or me can use it.
What I'm saying is if he did pull that off he would have to do it to everyone else, a lot of Flames fans. Otherwise it'd be singling out; discrimination.
Originally posted by DarkC
The internet itself is public; it was made public in the early 90's despite the US government's best efforts to prevent it.Proof? We're sitting here at KMC talking about it. Everyday consumers, like you or me can use it.
What I'm saying is if he did pull that off he would have to do it to everyone else, a lot of Flames fans. Otherwise it'd be singling out; discrimination.
You are completely and totally missing the point. Public domain is a legal term referring to things that can be used without worry of copyright infringement as the copyrights have expired on it, or it was never copyrighted.
And it's not discrimination. The person who made something and owns the copyright is the sole person allowed to decide what can and cannot be done with it. If he decided he only wanted it used on the official board then that's perfectly within his rights. If he decided that only people with blond hair between the age of 10 and 18 that can quack like a duck can use it, then that's his call.
That's how it goes.