Rip/Stolen/Ok?
- Started
- Last post
- 10 Responses
- MindFrame
Hey guys/girls:
So here's the big scoop:
For example, when somebody entireley rips the 2advanced site, but actually re-creates the website from scratch, code, graphics, the whole deal. And is presenting his own works in the portfolio section e.d. is it illegal to do this...? To re-create sites from scratch is no rip in my opinion... whats yours?
- nick0
be inspired, but make it your own....
too many idiots arent hiding their rips well enough... giving us ALL a bad name!
;p
- unknown0
"ah, i know what to do with this one!"
a> BALEETED!
a> DELTEATED!
a> CHADEATED!****FLAGARANT SYSTEM ERROR****
- juicysauce0
something tells me eric jordan would disagree.
anyways, why would you want to do that? 2advanced is exceptional because it's original.
find your own voice and do something original. you can do it! go go GO!
- MindFrame0
You guys did misundastood me a little bit here... im not a 2A fan in the least way... i wouldnt rip / re-create their site for the world, its just the concept-thought of the fact re-creating is not stealing or infridging copyrights.. when somebody takes a picture of the eifeltower the exact some angle as a really well-knows photographer that isnt infridging too? So is this?
- unknown0
if eric jordan had a penny for everytime 2A was listed on NT...he'd have alot of pennies.
- chef0
>>when somebody takes a
>>picture of the eifeltower the
>>exact some angle as a really
>>well-knows photographer that
>>isnt infridging too? So is this?no, that's just plain stupid.
f
- juicysauce0
as i understand it, the eifel tower pic (either the original or the rip) would not be protected under US copyright law.
why? because the law gives protection based on originality. unless the photography of the 'famous' eifel tower photo took the picture from a really innovative angle, it's not going to be protected.
web designs are subject to the same standards of originality. is it original? if so, then it's protected. if not, then it's not.
http://www.copyright.gov/title17…
"(1) A design is "original" if it is the result of the designer's creative endeavor that provides a distinguishable variation over prior work pertaining to similar articles which is more than merely trivial and has not been copied from another source."
- MindFrame0
"and has not been copied from another source." - So... making a website with almost exact same functionality and adjusted colors would be original i guess..
For the record: i am not planning to do so! Im just wondering how fellow designers are looking towards the concept of this not being a rip but a orinal creation from scratch...
Thanks for all the reactions so far
- MindFrame0
For the record: this imaginairy website would not contain the same graphic material of photo's. This will be distincitive from the 'orginal website'
- Voutje0
I only do print, but i know when you want to make something and want to improve yourself you better make sure youre input is good so that your output also will be. Did you invent the alphabet yourself? No, but someone teached you, and it is up to you to make the words.