No, my Mexican friend, he was English [I think]...

Basic problem:
Virtually no one here seems to understand Copyrights, trademarks, and trade dress. I see these terms used interchangeably.

They are very different.

I wrote up an article explaining the various differences:

https://www.wincustomize.com/browser/msgboard.asp?id=38616

"Jafo2"'s arguments are specious. Classic strawman argument.

As I pointed out on Neowin:
Many sites charge people to host people's copyrighted material. A skin site does not. Why? Because a skin site receives the license from the copyright holder (skin author) to distribute the skin author's content. The site hopes to recover the costs of distribution by getting the users of the site to contribute indirectly (via banner/pop up ads) or directly (via subscriptions, etc.). A user is not paying for the skins, icons, themes. They are not paying for the content. They are paying for the service being provided by the site.

The content of a site is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Users are asked to contribute to supporting the ongoing costs of providing the service of distributing the content.

And if that argument isn't enough for some reason for you, then there's the simple fact that anyone who has downloaded dozens of megabytes of WindowBlinds skins and DesktopX themes has certainly had enough time to "Evaluate" those programs to determine whether they should register it or not. We can debate all day whether some derivative of some skin is copyrighted or not. But there should be no doubt that WindowBlinds, DesktopX, ObjectBar, etc. ARE copyrighted and owned by Stardock, the same people who own this site and therefore have every right to restrict services to people who are not customers.

Jafo: HAHAHAHAHAHA....good one!!!!

Thank you frogboy for that link. I have to let this sink in. The brain is "gray"...I thought it was grey?
At least I make my own things.

Here is another thought. Even though we are not selling the skins it is believed that we are profiting from the usage of copyrighted material. The same cane be said for every site out that that host skins as well as banner ads or popup ads or sell subscriptions or any product on the site. Those sites also are profiting from hosting copyrighted material. If the likes of JAFO2 are going to have a problem with use restricting bandwidth usage because we have questionable copyrighted material on our site then they should speak up against all the other sites as well.

If not, then I just have to believe that their real problem is that they are just upset over our restriction and are using the copyright theory as a smoke screen to make noise. They don't really care about the copyright issues, just the fact they can no longer download skins from WinCustomize.

yikes! getting harder to tell Jafo from Frogboy these days by skimming over these threads
/me comes back to read after I grab my coffee

Doreen...I'm the cute one.....the other one is green and goes 'meep, meep'...

Well, I re-read Brad's article on copyright, trademark and trade dress, and I can see how the examples I mentioned (the Matrix, Xbox, WinXP and OSX skins) actually do fit with the policy mentioned there. But that doesn't mean that I totally agree with it. Specifically, like Koasati, I can't see the justification for the convenient grey area that you allow yourselves.

I am quite willing to admit that I may be one of those who don't fully understand the difference between copyright, trademark and trade dress violations. But I don't think I need to. I can sum up my attitude as: I do not have the right to copy other people's creations. For me that pretty much covers it, no grey areas.

If I recolour the bitmaps in an adni18 skin and post it back here, it's a rip.

If I make an official Spiderman wallpaper into a logon and post it here, it's a rip.

Even if I create a Spiderman wallpaper by drawing the picture myself from scratch, it's a rip. Because Marvel/Sony don't just hold copyright in specific pictures that appear on the Net or in comics or wherever, they hold copyright in the general likeness (the look and feel?) of Spiderman.

Ditto skins based on OS X - even without using the original images, it's still a rip. As Brad says, Apple have brought lawsuits based on trade dress - the look and feel. Put yourself in Apple's shoes - you would want people to make their computer look like OS X by buying a Mac, not by downloading a 100kb bundle of bitmaps to use with a $20 shareware program.

I am just struggling to see how you can allow yourselves this 'grey area' in your policy, where you seem to admit that most of the works are strictly rips, but you will only do something about it if the owner complains. You wouldn't wait for a skinner (who doesn't even stand to lose any money) to complain about a rip - you would pull it as soon as you noticed it, so are you saying that large corporations like Apple and Microsoft are fair game? Or is it because you get a lot of people coming to the site looking for OS X skins, so you are prepared to turn a blind eye ?

Just looking for a consistent approach, that's all...

WiseOldMan- "KarmaGirl: I think everyone has figured that out by now. Everyone on this thread is contributing in one form or another. The horse has died. Quit beating on it. Answer Mr Benn comment instead. You also have my money. "

Not everyone that reads the message boards actually contributes to the boards or the site. Just because it is read, does not mean that the person will post. As an example, this thread has 33 responses, but it has been read well over 300 times. So, obviously, not everyone who reads it contributes to the site.

I don't have much to answer for Mr Benn. I have never, at any time, stated that we have *no* "presence of copyrighted/trademarked/fan-based material on this site." I have worked at Stardock a long time (over 7 years) and have read letters from Apple Legal about removing everything on our site that was Apple based, or even had the word "aqua" in it. So, I think that I've learned what companies will sue over, and what they permit. Everything is inspired by something, so I see no harm in the "fan-based" (if you want to call it that) artwork, as long as it has original graphics made by the artist or graphics that the artist was given permission to use. If it is an obvious trademark or copyright violation, then it is not allowed up. If it accidentally gets through (as we are human, afterall) and it is brought to our attention, then we take immediate action. I wonder how many other sites have such strict guidelines?

I would add more about the download cap thing, but I think The Jafo has already covered that in great detail

Oh, and Jafo, the Frog say "ribbit". Meep Meep is what the roadrunner says!

Knee-deep, rabbit, four bob.....

Cheekymonkey just closed that thread at Neowin....I wonder if he realises his 'icon' beside his name, being 'Yoda' is copyrighted to LucasFilm. I know he's not the originator of the thread, but it's just amusing to have the image of Yoda closing a thread discussing the issues of copyright and trade-dress, etc...

Cute, huh?....

There are 3 basic levels of websites in the regard we're discussing (with lots of gray in between each level):

Level 1: Does not care about intellectual property rights. Basically a Warez site.

Level 2: Enforces basic intellectual property law. Follows the law doing no more or less than what the law requires.

Level 3: Enforces a stricter protection of intellectual property where IP law is taken to its logical end ("You may not use another person's stuff in any way at all, period.")

Most skin sites fall between 2 and 3. I would say that WinCustomize is by far the most strict (stricter than I would like personally) of all the skin sites.

At the end of the day, a legtimate site only has to be level 2. We don't have to be consistent. We can ban Britney Speers WinAmp skins simply because we don't like them while allowing a Spiderman WinAmp skin to go on even though they are the same type of thing. Ultimately, the moderators decide what they want to allow. We don't promise any more protection than level 2. We generally move closer to level 3 when it comes to protecting individuals and back to level 2 when it comes to protecting non-related corporations. Hence, if someone makes a Warcraft III skin that uses buttons and other GUI elements from the game, we'd likely accept that. You take Adni's various skins and Treetog's various skin elements and mix them together to make a new skin and submit, we would moderate that even though the skin may not violate copyright law (or trade dress). We reserve the right to make our own value calls on our site just as moderators on other sites do the same thing.

Fair enough - it's your site, your call. Sorry for waffling on, I just thought it was worth exploring a little.

Java maybe the frogs in Aussie land go meep meep instead of ribbit ribbit cuz they all have Aussie accents??? hehe

Does Autralia have frogs? I though they had penguins.

Green Penguins that say "meep meep"? Australia is an odd place...

"Green Penguins that say "meep meep"? Australia is an odd place... "

There's just something wrong about that image.

Mr. Benn, no problem, I love discussing this kind of stuff. (though I am a bit odd)..

Indeed (loves frogs for instance).

Australia has had frogs ever since Bart Simpson released the pet frog he brought with him on his trip to apologize for calling an Aussie collect.

Yes, Oz is a highly advanced country....we even have frogs......we also have the deadliest species of just about every dangerous critter there is....[probably including frogs]....even our mice can stand 8 feet tall and hop....

hehe Jafo