Bearded Kirklander Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Oh I agree that Angelo has no doubt helped to propel it to the level it is today.? But his claiming that he was a 'founder from day one' on his plan simply isn't true. No argument there. I'm just speculating. Storms like this often leave a lot of horrible destruction in their wake. Man, it justsucks> when stuff like this happens.:(( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Otto Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Anyone want to summarize this up in one post? Too much reading on one page to comprehend the entire thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dior_addict Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Anyone want to summarize this up in one post? Too much reading on one page to comprehend the entire thing. 586322447[/snapback] check a few posts back. a couple people have already summarized it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gelob Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 This is a real mess they have worked themselves into and I am happy that Jark is persuing legal means of regaining control of his creation. 586320530[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Kompressor Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Jarks response Aug. 3rd. http://jark.deviantart.com/ Matteo's on Aug. 1st. http://matteo.deviantart.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boeing 787 Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 The Layout annoys the hell out of me. The Artist's are all copyright NAZI's who think their precious scribblings are worth millions. One day I took some artwork that someone else had uploaded and used it on my personal computer, I took a screenshot and posted it on a forum. The Author emailed and threatened me telling me I wasn't allowed to use his artwork in anyway that he didn't approve and that I must ceist and desist from posting screenshots of it on my own personal computer. It wasn't the first time someone sent me a ceist and desist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b mitchell Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 ^ what he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Meh. Some of those folks get all conceited and arrogant. They need to get over themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiveMasterT Posted August 4, 2005 Author Share Posted August 4, 2005 The Layout annoys the hell out of me. The Artist's are all copyright NAZI's who think their precious scribblings are worth millions. One day I took some artwork that someone else had uploaded and used it on my personal computer, I took a screenshot and posted it on a forum. The Author emailed and threatened me telling me I wasn't allowed to use his artwork in anyway that he didn't approve and that I must ceist and desist from posting screenshots of it on my own personal computer. It wasn't the first time someone sent me a ceist and desist. 586323340[/snapback] bro, listen. three things for ya... 1. ever have someone recolorize something you made and call it their own? ever have the copyright to back it up? DA kinda has your back there in the event that happens. 2. You should never judge a community by one or two of the members you come across... most forums are really good except for the punks, but then again i guess what they say is true... a culture is defined by the ones least refined. 3. ceist is not a word. the word you are looking for is cease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ajapi Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 The Layout annoys the hell out of me. The Artist's are all copyright NAZI's who think their precious scribblings are worth millions. One day I took some artwork that someone else had uploaded and used it on my personal computer, I took a screenshot and posted it on a forum. The Author emailed and threatened me telling me I wasn't allowed to use his artwork in anyway that he didn't approve and that I must ceist and desist from posting screenshots of it on my own personal computer. It wasn't the first time someone sent me a ceist and desist. 586323340[/snapback] This may be off topic, but WTF is ceist? Hahahaha, if you mean cease, you need help. And before anyone gives me the "english isn't everyone's first language" crap, save it: I am dominican (Spanish is my first language), but I have the sense to look up word I'm not sure of before I post. As for artists being copyright Nazis, you probably haven't devoted much time to making a Wallpaper or something of the like. Tuning miniscule details no one but you will notice....It hurts to have something like that used and then not get credit for it, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 3. ceist is not a word.? the word you are looking for is cease. Spelling does not matter on Teh IntarWeb!:pp I think we could figure out what he meant, right? So no harm, no foul? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z3r0 Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 imho if you post something on deviantart you are making it free ... or is that just me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vykranth Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 You can post images, wallpapers or skins and explicitely copyright them on DA. Sadly, a lot of people had to put watermarks to prevent their work from being abusely used. I don't know the situtation will resolve on DeviantArt but from what I have read in the various related sites (Wincustomize or here) but it seems it's a really messy situation. I hope Jark and Matteo regain control of DeviantArt soon :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted August 4, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2005 The Layout annoys the hell out of me. The Artist's are all copyright NAZI's who think their precious scribblings are worth millions. One day I took some artwork that someone else had uploaded and used it on my personal computer, I took a screenshot and posted it on a forum. The Author emailed and threatened me telling me I wasn't allowed to use his artwork in anyway that he didn't approve and that I must ceist and desist from posting screenshots of it on my own personal computer. It wasn't the first time someone sent me a ceist and desist. 586323340[/snapback] Taking someone elses work and modifying it for your own use is fine. But when you post it without their permission you are violating their copyright. Stealing their work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Taking someone elses work and modifying it for your own use is fine. But when you post it without their permission you are violating their copyright. Stealing their work. 586324028[/snapback] Somehow, I don't see how posting a screenie of your desktop with a nice looking wallpaper on it, is breaking any kind of copyright... Posting your artwork to a public site grants anyone permission to use it for personal use as they see fit, as long as they don't try to claim credit or financial reward. If you claim it's your work, or try to profit from it in any way, it's a copyright breach, but just showing off a pic of your desktop? I don't think so... Besides, most people that do so tend to give credit where it's due... If the above ever happens to me, I'll just send a nice little "Bite me" reply back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Zeino Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Damn they really backstabbed jark over at deviantart.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwod Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 i read most of it..... ( not only the letters but those resign Journal ), it was surely a long read but most of the story has already been summarized in this thread. it is surely interesting to read. May be someone could make a noval out of it. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Never been a member of deviantart, but gotta say it seems to have become crap recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plastique Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 (edited) Somehow, I don't see how posting a screenie of your desktop with a nice looking wallpaper on it, is breaking any kind of copyright... Posting your artwork to a public site grants anyone permission to use it for personal use as they see fit, as long as they don't try to claim credit or financial reward.If you claim it's your work, or try to profit from it in any way, it's a copyright breach, but just showing off a pic of your desktop? I don't think so... Besides, most people that do so tend to give credit where it's due... If the above ever happens to me, I'll just send a nice little "Bite me" reply back... 586324297[/snapback] you don't have to see how it is a violation, but it is. Modifying it, or just posting it as a walpaper violate the bolded areas http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/us...06----000-.html ? 106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted worksRelease date: 2005-08-01 Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords; (2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;> (3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending; (4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly; (5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and (6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission. onemay> be able to avoid a lawsuit via the exceptions (doesn't degrade the market value) but it is also not educational. http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/us...07----000-.html ? 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair useRelease date: 2005-08-01 Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. Edited August 4, 2005 by Plastique Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 If some dude freaks because you want to use his pic as your personal wallpaper, no biggie, just don't use it. Then again, why would someone put something out there for public consumption and then be angry when people "consume" it? Using another's work to derive profit or for commercial gain is not acceptable of course, but I don't understand the objection to personal use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plastique Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 (edited) If some dude freaks because you want to use his pic as your personal wallpaper, no biggie, just don't use it.Then again, why would someone put something out there for public consumption and then be angry when people "consume" it? Using another's work to derive profit or for commercial gain is not acceptable of course, but I don't understand the objection to personal use. 586324977[/snapback] it is NOT for public consumption. It is for public looking at. There is a difference. Artists put their music on the free AM/FM radio but people are getting suid left and right for download and distributing music. It is the exact same thing! This is why half the wallpapers in the wallpaper section are violations (but the mods don't care unless it is one I made). According to the law (mind you this is a simplier version, but basicly the same thign sumed up) you are not distribute a copyritten work, or any modifications of that work, without expressed consent from the copyright holder. Edited August 4, 2005 by Plastique Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antaris Veteran Posted August 4, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2005 I hope Jark rapes Angelo for everything he's got, and either resume control of DA or go on and create an even better site :) 586321659[/snapback] Matteo has already said if things go pear shaped, he is willing to start a new fresh community post-deviantArt, and I think we should all mosey in and give them a hand ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 it is NOT for public consumption. It is for public looking at. There is a difference. Artists put their music on the free AM/FM radio but people are getting suid left and right for download and distributing music. It is the exact same thing! This is why half the wallpapers in the wallpaper section are violations (but the mods don't care unless it is one I made).According to the law (mind you this is a simplier version, but basicly the same thign sumed up) you are not distribute a copyritten work, or any modifications of that work, without expressed consent from the copyright holder. I hear ya. What I'm sayin' is that it should be totally cool to record stuff off of the AM/FM radio for PERSONAL USE ONLY - not for distribution. If an artist puts their picture on the internet for people to view in public, I think people should be allowed to download that pic for PERSONAL USE ONLY, say as wallpaper or background or something. Like it's legal to take a photograph of the Mona Lisa and blow it up, put it in your scrapbook, scan it and make it your Windows background, etc. But it should NOT be legal to take that photograph of the Mona Lisa and use it for commercial purposes or distribution. Sound cool? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Matteo has already said if things go pear shaped, he is willing to start a new fresh community post-deviantArt, and I think we should all mosey in and give them a hand ;) Then why did he go to all the trouble to fire the guy and take over? Why not just give DeviantArt to that fouder dude and then start his own thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laz Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 If an artist puts their picture on the internet for people to view in public, I think people should be allowed to download that pic for PERSONAL USE ONLY, say as wallpaper or background or something. 586325351[/snapback] Definately. I would be much obliged if someone used my work as their wallpaper, but there will always be people out there that will get all worked up about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts