Politician Archive
Thread: Are the new player cities an exercise in futility?
You're comparison of my site to Gamespot is truly an honor. Thank you for the compliment.
JaronElus wrote:
Also Sacred Nemesis, very nice site though I do have to ask how can you copyright your site when it is completely obvious that you tookthe designfrom Gamespot? Unless you are affiliated with Gamespot by some means, which if it is the case, I apologize but I am very curious on this.
First off that post was completely uncalled for. Not only did you insult me but you also insulted my city. I did not insult you ONCE throughout this entire discussion. We were only having a civilized discussion on how Gamespot and your site have close resemblences and with the other responses, I am not the only one that has the same opinion. I even said that if your site was not based on Gamespot and the resemblence was an honest mistake or have an affiliation with Gamespot then I apologized for the accusation, however you come in here insulting me when it was a logical accusation.
It abhors me even more that you say you are a web designer, which if that is the case you must have seen Gamespot's website. I was just asking if you consciously or sub-consciously used some of the ideas on Gamespot. The top navigation bar was not the only resemblence. But also show me another site that uses a navigation bar exactly like that.
Second off, I take offense that you think this has to do with jealousy. I am definitely not jealous of your site for a site only goes so far in showing how successful a PA is. For your information, I just started to create my site on the 24th that is why it has zero content and is still being polished.
I never said your site was a rip off. All I said was that it looked very similar and I was asking you about it. The copyright debate was just there because it gives some people the wrong impression that your site and layout is distinctly familiar. As I said I don't care what you do and I said it was a nice site, I was just curious. Your insults were not needed and a logical explanation would have taken care of the situation. All I wanted to hear was that it was a coincidence and nothing more. But your insults on me, my city and my web site capabilities (with your offering to help with my web site) I find very insulting. Next time, when in a discussion don't sink so low that you are using petty insults when a logical explanation was just needed.
JaronElus wrote:
Actually you can Vadikar for I have done it on a few of my sites that are commercial based for other companies.
But the Site as an entirety correct? You can cover individual peices or the whole thing, but not the "idea" or the "layout" of a site. That's like trying to get a Patent on a hamburger with dill pickles instead of sweet pickles.
Individual images and fonts can't of course be copyrighted but the overall design as an entity can.
I think this depends on the conext. Fonts and Images are copywritten all the time. Of course if you use a font in your site that is not a TT, then it won't display unless you "give" it to the user at load time. Thus making it hard to copywright.
And it is completely obvious that it was taken from Gamespot for their entire website looks exactly like Gamespot with a few alterations even many of the colors are the same which doesn't help their case.
I agree, but as a graphic designer I take things from other places when I see something I like (without stealing it outright :-). The same is done here. It's obvious where he got the bulk of his design.
But yes you can copyright designs for commercial based websites. Their site is only illegal because they, themselves, put a copyright on (because they are calling their own designs original). Just take that copyright off and they would be fine.
I agree here to. The use of the "copywright" is also not advised since no one would ever pay to copywright a fan site. Put up a legal page and disclaimer about your original art, and for others not to use it, but you are safer by not putting "copywright" on it, where it doesn't exist. You never know who's checking out your pages.
Of course the bottom line is; it's a nice site and no one really cares where it came from and whether it has been copywrighted or not... :-)
I agree here to. The use of the "copywright" is also not advised since no one would ever pay to copywright a fan site. Put up a legal page and disclaimer about your original art, and for others not to use it, but you are safer by not putting "copywright" on it, where it doesn't exist. You never know who's checking out your pages.
That is what I am trying to get at mainly. I don't care if they do it or not, it isn't as though I will report them to Gamespot or anything. I just think it is rude to the original creator of the Gamespot website when you don't give them credit for the design. Just when they have a copyright on the website that they didn't create it orginally, is just a slap in a face to the orginal designer for the Gamespot website is one of the best websites I see on the internet. That is all I am saying.
Vadikar wrote:
I agree here to. The use of the "copywright" is also not advised since no one would ever pay to copywright a fan site. Put up a legal page and disclaimer about your original art, and for others not to use it, but you are safer by not putting "copywright" on it, where it doesn't exist. You never know who's checking out your pages.
Copyright doesn't actually have to be registered and paid for to exist. It's an automatic right you have, and can defend if you can prove you were the originator of the work. For example, if I draw a picture, I own the copyright. The main reason for paying to register is that it is absolute proof I drew that picture. I could prove it through other means of course (in the case of a picture taken from a scan on the 'net, I could produce the original drawn picture as proof). The entire site layout couldn't be copyrighted, but any original text or images could be (excluding SWG screenshots... SoE and LucasArts own that copyright).
You need to be careful howyou label it though. It really needs to be labelled with 'Copyright' a date, and the round copyright symbol. As well as a brief paragraph on what the copyright covers, and the allowed usage of any bits and pieces. If you don't do this, you risk not being able to support your claim to copyright later, so it's highly advised to label all original work.
It's also advised to give copyright credit where it's due. Most companies turn a blind eye to fan sites, but it's a good idea to list who owns the copyrightof themedia you're being a fan of. In this case, SoE and LucasArts. This makes it crystal clear you aren't claiming copyright for their work, only yours.