Vote for the new I club header!!!
11-07-2010, 07:12 PM
#138
Well if thats the case, did Ransack, Hwob90, or stupidchicken receive approval also? It seems that you are just singling me out for some reason. Is the current banner "approved"?
11-07-2010, 07:21 PM
#139
VIP Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 22,776
Car Info: '13 BRZ Limited / '02 WRX
Hwob90 and StupidChicken aren't really in the running with such a small number of votes, so it's not really an issue. Ransack's image can easily be traced back to the owner (either LIC or the photographer) to get approval. Yours is most likely owned by SOA, so good luck getting the copyright. And if you had read through all of the info in the "design" thread you would have seen that the photo in the current banner is owned by i-club. Sorry, but sometimes things on the interwebs are real and serious. Its not all fun and photoshop all the time.
11-07-2010, 07:53 PM
#140
Hwob90 and StupidChicken aren't really in the running with such a small number of votes, so it's not really an issue. Ransack's image can easily be traced back to the owner (either LIC or the photographer) to get approval. Yours is most likely owned by SOA, so good luck getting the copyright. And if you had read through all of the info in the "design" thread you would have seen that the photo in the current banner is owned by i-club. Sorry, but sometimes things on the interwebs are real and serious. Its not all fun and photoshop all the time.
11-07-2010, 08:26 PM
#141
Meh, its not worth the effort. Ill let the mods take care of it if they see it that way. I understand your point in the copyright thing, its just from the get go it seemed like you where after me like I stole the banana out of your lumpia.
11-07-2010, 08:50 PM
#142
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 3,462
Car Info: 2008 MB C350S Chip/Exhaust 268whp
Ransack's image can easily be traced back to the owner (either LIC or the photographer) to get approval. Yours is most likely owned by SOA, so good luck getting the copyright. And if you had read through all of the info in the "design" thread you would have seen that the photo in the current banner is owned by i-club. Sorry, but sometimes things on the interwebs are real and serious. Its not all fun and photoshop all the time.
Subaru promotes love of their brand, therefore, it is not a distant shot to get it approved. The site itself is a free ad for SoA.
Assumption is a funny thing, especially if it is coming from a staff member.
Addenum: Alex got the Cusco car to put the iclub sticker on the car years ago and got permission to use it.
11-07-2010, 08:52 PM
#143
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Behind you...Waiting
Posts: 2,813
Car Info: about 30 miles a day
and you know cuz you're a lawyer? voters vote. hypocrites say something is wrong for one but is ok for another person. i'll let George Takei tell you what my vote is...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YAFM4ATJiU
11-07-2010, 09:41 PM
#145
VIP Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 22,776
Car Info: '13 BRZ Limited / '02 WRX
Since it's a legal thing, why not pull Ransack's too? Afterall, you did say that it can be traced and yet to get approval("to"). Want to be fair? Pull both until you get the legal permissions.
Subaru promotes love of their brand, therefore, it is not a distant shot to get it approved. The site itself is a free ad for SoA.
Subaru promotes love of their brand, therefore, it is not a distant shot to get it approved. The site itself is a free ad for SoA.
The stage these things are at right now, in theory, aren't really "final" as evident by slight changes being made. Also, the client (i-club.com) has been told by Ransack "This design contains this image, for which the copyright will have to be "purchased." That is how you do it. You don't say "Oh, yeah, I took this image from google. If you want to use it you can go find the owner and ask.
The Library of Congress will search for the owner of an image for you, for $165/hr with a minimum charge of 2 hours. Or you can search through all of their records yourself.
and you know cuz you're a lawyer? voters vote. hypocrites say something is wrong for one but is ok for another person. i'll let George Takei tell you what my vote is...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YAFM4ATJiU
Last edited by VRT MBasile; 11-07-2010 at 09:47 PM.
11-07-2010, 10:03 PM
#146
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 3,462
Car Info: 2008 MB C350S Chip/Exhaust 268whp
It was an assumption that the image is owned by SoA, but the actual owner of the image is unknown. You want to find the unknown owner to get permission? That is why I said pull it, otherwise you have a Mt Hammy t-shirt fiasco all over again. People vote a winner, but then it cant be used and we have wasted A LOT of time and gotten nowhere. As of right now I-club is not using the photos for any sort of profit, so a lawsuit is very unlikely. Once they make a copyrighted image their masthead it becomes a big issue.
The stage these things are at right now, in theory, aren't really "final" as evident by slight changes being made. Also, the client (i-club.com) has been told by Ransack "This design contains this image, for which the copyright will have to be "purchased." That is how you do it. You don't say "Oh, yeah, I took this image from google. If you want to use it you can go find the owner and ask.
The Library of Congress will search for the owner of an image for you, for $165/hr with a minimum charge of 2 hours. Or you can search through all of their records yourself.
The stage these things are at right now, in theory, aren't really "final" as evident by slight changes being made. Also, the client (i-club.com) has been told by Ransack "This design contains this image, for which the copyright will have to be "purchased." That is how you do it. You don't say "Oh, yeah, I took this image from google. If you want to use it you can go find the owner and ask.
The Library of Congress will search for the owner of an image for you, for $165/hr with a minimum charge of 2 hours. Or you can search through all of their records yourself.
Again, 'assumption' is a funny thing. You are TAUGHT in law school to make sound logical assumptions. You really need to apply it here.
Oh by the way, I do much work with the Creative Commons licenses with my photography. I've sold a whole portfolio to a large gaming firm. I understand there needs to be rights to someone's work, however, if you are to say someone's work should be pulled and yet another person's work, which has an image that rights are not yet obtained, should be still there, that has huge problems in logic.
11-07-2010, 10:27 PM
#147
VIP Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 22,776
Car Info: '13 BRZ Limited / '02 WRX
You miss my point. You insist the fact there needs to be permission for an image to be used and since Aeros' image is made on an assumption that rights could not be obtained it should have been pulled and disqualified. Whereas, Ransack's image source's rights are NOT YET obtained and still be up?
Photography and selling your rights is different from gaining rights to something else. Would you have expected the gaming firm to buy your portfolio before they decided if they were even going to use it?
But actually, you're half way right, everyone that used an image should have found out before hand if the rights to it are available, although the rights don't need to be purchased until the design is approved and put in place.
Last edited by VRT MBasile; 11-07-2010 at 10:38 PM.
11-08-2010, 12:38 AM
#150
Registered User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek/BayArea, CA
Posts: 1,831
Car Info: 2009 WRB WRX Sedan
As for my picture even though I have little votes. I did a little bit of research and couldnt find the actual source of the picture or who originally started with it due to many sites using the same picture for advertisement purposes. www.japanesesportscars.com seems to have one of the best articles containing the picture I used and many others of the 2011 STI but again I am not exactly sure if I should even contact them since like I said there is nothing about where my picture original is from. I know about copyrights and stuff and I absolutely dont want a law suit do to something as simple as the banner. If you guys want to pull mine from voting so be it. No hard feelings I dont want any mishaps happening because of something simple. I have been in the community for a couple years and would like to see it keep on going and not be shut down due to a banner.
Link to the images I am talking about-
http://www.japanesesportcars.com/201...how_11044.html
Link to the images I am talking about-
http://www.japanesesportcars.com/201...how_11044.html