Confused about copyright submission guidelines

you called the right shot here!

we are a pretty hypocritical lot, and this subject has been brought up before. good luck with it.

one supposed reason is not all moderators are familiar with all copyrighted work, so some things get through. if you find any, let the admins know and supposedly they'll remove them so the site isn't sued.

but like you point out, there is a bunch floating around and we'd rather complain about other sites than police our own here first...


* maybe this should be in the FAQ...

I'd gladly include this in the how to make skins FAQ, if I could get a clear, and logical answer as to why this is a rip, but that falls in the "gray/grey" area.

Why was this Xbox Logon rejected, when this was accepted?
https://www.wincustomize.com/skins.asp?searchtext=xbox+xtremexp&sort=updatedate&order=Descending&library=1

After I wrote the initial message, I walked through the web site. I can't tell you how many ripoffs there are. What bothers me is that MS puts the XBox logos, complete with .psd files right on their web site for people to use. It's there like "go ahead, take it. Here's the Photoshop source!!". No license agreement or anything. They even put of the fonts and other items for people to use.

The Fathom image I can understand, but again, there's a lot of ripped off artwork on this site.

And don't get me started on icons.

XBox login preview:
http://homepage.mac.com/starman/.Public/xboxblackpreview.jpg

The Fathom login I did for OS X:
http://homepage.mac.com/starman/FathomLogin.jpg

Mike

they draw you in to make you feel less uncomfortable, and then sik the lawyers on you

I gotta apologize for my first comment here...I had just gotten done with JM33's thread and was feeling pretty irritated.

The admins here really do a great job, and although I had a sarcastic edge, I really did mean that sometimes they simply aren't aware of all things uploaded that may be copyrighted. Remember, we are from a lot of different countries here, and not everything is globally known as far as popular works that are copyrighted.

I don't know the case in question but here's my take:

Fair use is taken to a large degree here. If you use someone else's trademark in fair use it can still get accepted. However, the quality required to get past moderation grows. Specifically, wallpapers and logons, which, if left unmoderated, would get filled with very low quality content, have to be of a pretty high level to get in (that level depends on the moderator in question). But when you use copyrighted material, even in fair use, it means that the quality of the overall work has to be significantly higher.

So for instance, taking an X-box wallpaper and turning it into a logon in a few minutes is a lot more likely to get rejected than something that used totally original content. That doesn't mean that no X-box logos and such woudl be allowed, just that the quality has to be significantly higher.

I don't know the case in question but here's my take:

Fair use is taken to a large degree here. If you use someone else's trademark in fair use it can still get accepted. However, the quality required to get past moderation grows. Specifically, wallpapers and logons, which, if left unmoderated, would get filled with very low quality content, have to be of a pretty high level to get in (that level depends on the moderator in question). But when you use copyrighted material, even in fair use, it means that the quality of the overall work has to be significantly higher.

So for instance, taking an X-box wallpaper and turning it into a logon in a few minutes is a lot more likely to get rejected than something that used totally original content. That doesn't mean that no X-box logos and such woudl be allowed, just that the quality has to be significantly higher.

That's not a good enough answer. There are a LOT of "slapped together" items on this site which violate copyright.

I actually put quite a bit of work into mine. Of course it doesn't look that way since everything it black and green, but it was still more than just slapping an XBox logo in Logon Studio.

Mike

did your rejection notice specifically say it was rejected due to copyright infringement?

if so, THAT should be the focus, not quality of work judged by a moderator, right? (only relating to copyrighted materials submitted)

it either IS or IS NOT copyrighted, or it isn't a point to be used for moderating, right?


...or am I totally off on this one too?

I moderated that one. And I'll tell you exactly why (since you made this all public )- it looks like the other 50+ XBox logon/Walls that have come through. It's easier to email somebody saying "don't use copyrighted materials" than, "Your logon looks like the last 10 XBox logons that I rejected".

As for taking Drawings and such from other sources, if it is a direct rip of that artwork (such as cartoon drawings)just don't do it. Draw it yourself. If you ripped it, don't use it. Logos are one thing (as they promote a product) whereas just simply ripping drawings and artwork doesn't promote anyone or anything but yourself.

Best bet is- do the work yourself. If you like XBox, don't just rip the artwork- make it better. Make it your own work that is "fan art" or something that promotes the art that you admire. Make it different from all the others.

As for the XBox skin that goes with Skins Factory's Media Player, I think you will find that Skins Factory (which I think gave permission on some of the graphics) has a bit of connection with Microsoft

Some moderators are more strict than others. If I see something that is copyrighted, I really look at it. If it is exactly the same as a graphic I can find elsewhere (as in: it was ripped from another source), there is no reason to accept it. If it is an original work of art that resembles something else, then it is worth looking into as to the quality of the work.

In general, ripping is just bad. Doing the work yourself will get you much further ahead in life.

As for the XBox skin that goes with Skins Factory's Media Player, I think you will find that Skins Factory (which I think gave permission on some of the graphics) has a bit of connection with Microsoft

If I recall correctly, Skins Factory, was quite upset about this skin, because it was NOT sanctioned by MS, as the WMP skin was.



The reason the logon was rejected sounds valid, but this 'gray area', (trade dress, etc.) only confuses the subject of ripping.

It is important to be aware that some of the works which 'appear' to be clear 'rips' are infact authorized public releases commissioned by the Companies concerned.

Some members have the capacity to upload direct, bypassing 'moderation', and, it is possible that one or two of those may be of questionable content. If so, contact an Admin direct and it will be looked into.
Try NOT to publicly name 'names' as defamation in error can occur.

Now that I have broadband, perhaps I can go a-hunting through the site and kick things that have 'slipped through' inadvertently...