inicio mail me! sindicaci;ón

plagiarism revisited

June 6, 2002 at 12:25 pm · Filed under Rigamarole

Have been seeing the drama going on between aiwei.net and mywonderful.net concerning the subject of ripping off other people’s sites.

The story is that aiwei.net had a site design and then mywonderful.net created a similar design without asking permission, but giving credit for the idea.

jesus said something about it before… It doesn’t really matter because nothing here was completely copied and nothing here was completely original in the first place. The main concern at this situation here was that A. The site in question was side scrolling. B. The site in question contained female models/singers. C. The site in question had iframes. — These were the three main things that pretty much made the sites very similar to each other.

aiwei.net, although I feel sorry that she had to go to the hospital from the stress of trying to think up an original layout, I think should chill. First of all, the two sites don’t even have the same general feeling between the two, and truthfully, neither site looks that original to me.

I’ve been making webpages for five years, throughout these five years, I’ve seen countless sites that use models, side scrolling and iframes. yes, I’ve even seen them used together. The first time i saw this was three years ago when the ever-so-popular nick@asianx.net did it [the site is down now… too old]. My point is, though, that aiwei.net really wasn’t the first one to do it — hell, I saw it done three years before her idea existed.

So why get so pissed?

It’s like getting mad at someone for having a layout that has navigation on the left because your navigation was also on the left. o_O

—

Admittedly, I became very very angry when a girl decided to rip off my site layout, so this may seem hypocritical to some people. However there’s a difference (I think) from ripping off like this:


my site
their site

aiwei.net
mywonderful.net

Personally, I don’t think that the two sites are similar enough to get mad about copyright laws over. I think that mywonderful.net was doing aiwei.net a service by crediting her in the first place when she didn’t really need to because the site wasn’t really as copied as aiwei.net made it out to be. I also think that aiwei.net should calm down. If her site were truly original, I might say something different… but it’s not. I’ve seen it done a million times before it feels like… And as you can see from MY personal experience, the copycatting/plagiarism can go much worse than what happened to her.. So I really can’t feel sorry for aiwei.net.

Inspiration is not plagiarism. If similar form was considered plagiarism then every table-based site that has a top image and words down the center of it and a right-hand-side navigational section that came before me is being plagiarized. Yeah… Roiiiite.

jo said,

June 6, 2002 @ 1:35 pm

wordddddd upppp :D

Ivy said,

June 6, 2002 @ 3:36 pm

hi girl! that’s for your opinion but the law is my opinion. =)http://www.whatiscopyright.org and the girl credited me AFTER I warned her about it. so yeah.. it’s just too bad for her. but thanks anyways!

kim said,

June 6, 2002 @ 4:31 pm

from whatiscopyright.org :

There is one thing that must be clarified, though. If you see a certain page layout and like the way it looks, you could "legally" reproduce something similar if you write the coding all by yourself without copying any of the source code from the original page. The actual intangible idea may not be copyrighted. What is copyrighted is the tangible result of the idea, which would be the layout written out in HTML coding and saved to a hard drive. That means no copying and pasting of another person’s source code.

how can you prove that she used your code?

marz said,

June 6, 2002 @ 7:05 pm

personally i think the whole argument you brought out is in your opinon. you can’t say that people SHOULD be *that much* hurt or upset due to a copying of a layout. so whatever ivy wishes to say about who copies who is in her opinion. i don’t think other people in the net should really start preaching about it.

pooline said,

June 6, 2002 @ 7:21 pm

alright. i think that the to sites look SOMEWHAT alike, but it was not plagiarism, i agree with kim that it was just inspiration. aiwei.net should be happy that mywonderful.net gave her credit. kim i saw that plagiarism that someone did to your site…and that is just too much. that’s straight up copy and paste. heh.

katie said,

June 6, 2002 @ 8:52 pm

I think they’re both.. ugly.. so it doesn’t really matter. And if we want to talk about what is copyright… I’m damn sure she didn’t take those pictures herself.

kim said,

June 6, 2002 @ 10:45 pm

marz-
I’m saying that she shouldn’t be pissed in the sense that she wants to sue because it’s not her place to be pissed about the so-called stealing in the first place because it wasn’t stealing.

kim said,

June 6, 2002 @ 10:50 pm

p.s. i agree with katie, too… but i just needed something to post about besides my emotions. hahaha

Ivy said,

June 7, 2002 @ 1:27 am

she only gave me credit after being reminded and only faked her name and insulted for my reminder numerous times..that’s spamming. and yes I think it’s copying as everything even organization is copied. u haven’t seen my real layout..u wouldn’t know… even the words and the placement .. like "long loading please wait" and stuff.. and "The copyright notice at the bottom of a website only pertains to the content that one has actually created, not to what was created by another and is being used with permission. Owner’s terms may vary, but it is always best to include text on the same page where the material on loan is being used to specify who the real owner is, and that it is being used with permission. To an extent, this would protect you as well as the appropriate owner as it would be notifying the public that the material is owned by someone…if you failed to properly protect someone else’s work that you are using and it turns out that someone else swiped it due to your misuse or negligence you may be subjecting yourself to a claim. " it would be better if she asked before she does anything. thanks.

Ivy said,

June 7, 2002 @ 1:27 am

she only gave me credit after being reminded and only faked her name and insulted for my reminder numerous times..that’s spamming. and yes I think it’s copying as everything even organization is copied. u haven’t seen my real layout..u wouldn’t know… even the words and the placement .. like "long loading please wait" and stuff.. and "The copyright notice at the bottom of a website only pertains to the content that one has actually created, not to what was created by another and is being used with permission. Owner’s terms may vary, but it is always best to include text on the same page where the material on loan is being used to specify who the real owner is, and that it is being used with permission. To an extent, this would protect you as well as the appropriate owner as it would be notifying the public that the material is owned by someone…if you failed to properly protect someone else’s work that you are using and it turns out that someone else swiped it due to your misuse or negligence you may be subjecting yourself to a claim. " it would be better if she asked before she does anything. thanks.

Ivy said,

June 7, 2002 @ 1:34 am

yes I did take the picturesm katie and I saved my old layout and her layout for evidence. I choose what I wanna go with me anger. Thanks.

passerby said,

June 7, 2002 @ 2:04 am

errmmm….. I stumble in here once in awhile… I think that girl is hella trippin over nothing… go ahead and sue! make a fool of yourself! I don’t see whats so great about the layout that you gotta get all worked up over. You trippin… make a REALLY original design AND THEN bitch when/if someone steals it. You aren’t the first person in the world to do side scrolling and all those boxes and s***t… listen to Kim! She knows what she is talking about.

marz said,

June 7, 2002 @ 3:17 am

i think she’s got the right to chose on how to deal with her anger. you can’t preach to the world on how to put a ruler on your emotions. so whether or not it was copied.. it doesn’t really matter, because it’s her issue.. not yours.

alex said,

June 7, 2002 @ 7:48 am

I haven’t really read all of the other comments so I probably won’t be following the train of the current conversation but all i want to say is that this was one of the best posts ever.

More and more teenagers are getting into web design. It’s important for them to realize that one day or the other someone is bound to copy(or be inspired by, in this case) their design. But what really ticks me off is their illegal version of photoshop 6. You’re not unique, please look around and stop being so pompeous.

Now, back to our regular programming…

kim said,

June 7, 2002 @ 8:46 am

I think it really is my issue, as a fellow web designer. Who is to say who has copied what from whom? Especially when two sites are so dissimilar?

If it were true that anybody could get mad and sue or going to officials or whatever for copyright whenever this happened — similarities in design that is — then there would be a lot more suing going on.

So what I’m saying is why get pissed when there’s nothing to get pissed about? It’s not like either of them are that great of artists anyway.

marz said,

June 7, 2002 @ 9:31 am

i guess you go in whichever way you want to go. i think ivy should go with her anger if she feels like it. people shouldn’t tell her how to feel and what to feel. if that’s your opinion about the issue, so be it.

and by the way, i think you direct-linked the screen shot off her site. wasn’t this argument about plagerism, hm?

kim said,

June 7, 2002 @ 9:41 am

this is about plagiarism, yes. But marz, you need to brush up on your words, because I don’t think you know what plagiarism means.

http://www.dictionary.com:
plagiarism

n 1: a piece of writing that has been copied from someone else and is presented as being your own work 2: the act of plagiarizing; taking someone’s words or ideas as if they were your own

I didn’t copy that shit from her and say it was mine, and personally, I don’t want that shit on my own server. If she wants to change the images or whatevers, she can feel free to do it… but it’ll weaken her argument. whether I take it from her site, or download it onto mine and post it up, it doesn’t matter. technically, I was citing a source to prove my point… I wasn’t copying her shit and saying it was mine.

and if you’ve ever written anything, you’ll know that there’s nothing illegal about using sources to strengthen your argument.

kim said,

June 7, 2002 @ 9:43 am

oh yeah, and it IS my opinion on the issue. my opinion is that she shouldn’t get mad, and that if she sues the other girl then she’s just wasting time, money and effort on her part when she could be using that energy to do something better…

like brushing up on her design skills or something.

katie said,

June 7, 2002 @ 9:00 pm

Wait, so.. she took the pictures of those "models?" Erm. okay. Like I care anyway. If she has the money to threaten legal action on this, more power to her rich ass. I don’t even have the money to buy a pack of gum. I’m open to donations though, rich girl.

katie said,

June 7, 2002 @ 9:04 pm

And dude.. those tables of yours on the left… they look awfully like my tables! Ohh I’m going to suuuuuuue.

vu said,

June 7, 2002 @ 10:01 pm

both sites look hella gay

marz said,

June 8, 2002 @ 3:59 am

tell me.. if it’s your argument, you should know what you want, without having to PROVE to everyone that you’re correct. why are you getting so defensive? now you’re the one acting hypocrite. you simply don’t stick your nose into everyone’s site and preach the so called "good word" about "how people should do things on the internet".

if you were really smart, you would have stayed out of other people’s issues.

and no matter what you try to drive into my ear, i will stick with my opinion.
i don’t have to prove anything.

and what gives you the right on saying that the two webdesigners are bad artists? look at yourself first.

then YOU should reevaluate your words.

have "fun" in the states. don’t get stalked by some internet mofo there.

mick said,

June 9, 2002 @ 5:57 am

Being an artist, I tend to look at this ‘plagiarism’ issue from a different perspective. I am of the opinion that the web is as much a creative medium as it is an information delivery system. Those people who create the webs content are bound to be influenced by their peers and will take what they need in order to create their own work, just as an artist will take influences from other artists. Even what may seem like the direct copying another’s work can still be construed as an original act. While it may seem that I condone this behaviour and, at times might be guilty of it myself, I do consider that everyone has an obligation to be as original as possible. It’s just a matter of conscience.

Kris said,

June 9, 2002 @ 2:01 pm

Ivy

The two sites do definatly not look the same, nor is their structure or their HTML.

The only thing that is similar is the wack idea of scrolling sideways, which made me decide to close the window in less than seconds. I will not horiscroll even if it were a pornside! And so will many others decide.
So in this regard, if, hypothetically, there is any copying of an idea at all, it is a copy of a bad idea.

To some persons it may appear that sidescrolling is an original concept because there are very little sites around make use of this as a feature. Did it ever occur to you why this is?

It is very easy to defend against someone suing you for copying an idea of sidescrolling. Sidescrolling is namely not a technique of any kind, it is a result of browser behaviour when content doesn’t fit a User Agent’s viewport . Enlarge the window to a fullscreen 1600×1200 and where is your sidescrolling? Now get it?

Will someone please sue every other designer for stealing the idea of vertical scrolling? And all those that stole the idea of designing the content this small that if does fit the window and no scrolling is induced at all? And please sue all those who use iframes, while you’re at it.

The first step in claiming copyright for something, is to prove that the object is truly yours. Your HTML is not yours, your techniques are not yours, even the idea you try to defend so much isn’t yours. And I’ll shut up before I raise some more questions about what else is not yours (and I don’t want you to sue me for slander, now would I?).

Make something really original and it’s quality will stand ground by itself. In all other cases, shut up, get off the web and keep your ‘precious’ ideas to yourself if want to prevent anyone from getting inspired.

kim said,

June 10, 2002 @ 1:08 pm

marz –
I find your posts highly entertaining, mainly because they’re generally so off, completely.

I told you to reevaluate your words because you used a term incorrectly. I’m sorry if you think I’m trying to shove drivel in your ear, but I just felt that you would like to know that you were using a word incorrectly — therefore nullifying everything you said because it proves you have little control over the english language.

I DO have a right to say that the other two are bad artists because everyone has a right to say whether or not a certain thing is pleasing to the eye or not. One does not have to be an artist themself to be able to criticize works. For example, how many movie critics do you know actually make movies?

Additionally, I’ll stick my nose anywhere I damn well want to. As you say, it’s everyone’s business to choose how they react to a certain situation, and this was my choice. I felt that my rights as a web designer were personally being attacked as a whole, so I defended them.

—

By the way, what do you mean by have ‘fun’ in the states? I LIVE in the states…

katie said,

June 10, 2002 @ 1:36 pm

"and what gives you the right on saying that the two webdesigners are bad artists? look at yourself first."

uhm.. the fact that i have EYEBALLS.

whew.. your logic skills are amaaaaazing.

dave said,

June 10, 2002 @ 2:36 pm

i think everyone should shut-up. nobody here including me is original at any kind of design so we should all shut up. if we were, we wouldn’t be here arguing about it because it would be understood that we are original "leet" "uber" designers. such like praystation or designersrepublic or the myriad of other good, innovative sites.

all of our art has a source which is based on everything since cavemen scratched pictures of deer on cave walls.

as for legal technicalities, so:

how many of you took those pictures of models?

how many of you are using an illegal version of photoshop?

how many of you have bootlegged MP3’s?

how many of you have bootlegged software?

how many of you are using illegal clipart or stock photography without the legal consent to do so?

as for showing a small screen art of a site, you are perfectly allowed to do that under fair-use laws. you are only giving an example of the site.

from all the people here, i have to agree with Kris here. kim, you shouldn’t be calling other people bad artists (well, at least publically– god knows i make fun of a lot of people), everyone has their ups and downs with site designs and you have had your off days (just as I do/did).

as for the degree of how angry someone wants to get, let them deal with it. why do you have to get in on it and criticize them for their emotions. people are allowed to have their own feelings and opinions. i mean by making this post, you have voiced yours, which leaves you open to haters as well. not that it matters, drama = more hits yo.

dave said,

June 10, 2002 @ 2:38 pm

oh, the last two sentences is directed at everyone in particular.

Kris said,

June 10, 2002 @ 4:20 pm

> how many of you took those pictures of models?

I don’t but perhaps a next girlfriend is willing to participate in such a project

> how many of you are using an illegal version of photoshop?

Been there, done that, still feel untalented. No stuff like that on my comp anymore.

> how many of you have bootlegged MP3’s?

Last weeks HD crash killed 6 gigs of MP3 and my motivation of stealing anymore music. Been backing up my *own* CD collection since.

> how many of you have bootlegged software?

Some shareware that I obnoxiously refuse to pay fees for, does that count?
I even started to *buy* software over the past year. Now that gives a good feeling about yourself, it really does.

Gotten back to basics and a clean slate actually feels good, and I don’t need much for webauthoring anyway. A $30 copy of GIMP would be nice though. It would likely make me never wanna use Photoshop again.
The company I work at allow me to install my Photoshop license at my home computer, but it’s version 6 — not ready for Mac OS X — so, I don’t want it anyway. Perhaps once they buy 7, I may reconsider.

Pictures are overrated. Content is king. Explore the ins and outs of your favorite text-editor, get a grip on XHTML and CSS, learn appreciate the notion of "less is more", write something that is actually worth reading and crowds of virgins will be rewarded upon you in the afterlife :P

Kris said,

June 10, 2002 @ 4:27 pm

> how many of you took those pictures of models?

I don’t but perhaps a next girlfriend is willing to participate in such a project

> how many of you are using an illegal version of photoshop?

Been there, done that, still feel untalented. No stuff like that on my comp anymore.

> how many of you have bootlegged MP3’s?

Last weeks HD crash killed 6 gigs of MP3 and my motivation of stealing anymore music. Been backing up my *own* CD collection since.

> how many of you have bootlegged software?

Some shareware that I obnoxiously refuse to pay fees for, does that count?
I even started to *buy* software over the past year. Now that gives a good feeling about yourself, it really does.

Gotten back to basics and a clean slate actually feels good, and I don’t need much for webauthoring anyway. A $30 copy of GIMP would be nice though. It would likely make me never wanna use Photoshop again.
The company I work at allow me to install my Photoshop license at my home computer, but it’s version 6 — not ready for Mac OS X — so, I don’t want it anyway. Perhaps once they buy 7, I may reconsider.

Pictures are overrated. Content is king. Explore the ins and outs of your favorite text-editor, get a grip on XHTML and CSS, learn appreciate the notion of "less is more", write something that is actually worth reading and crowds of virgins will be rewarded upon you in the afterlife :P

kim said,

June 10, 2002 @ 4:34 pm

Haha, unfortunately, when it’s drama btw two sites that don’t get much traffic in the first place, I didn’t get any increase in hits from them. :) Oh well!

Dave said,

June 10, 2002 @ 5:09 pm

hahaha, Kris is an example of an "uber" something. i forget exactly what but i’m done with that whole hacking credit cards thing. haha

i have to disagree that a 30 dollar copy of gimp is going to be better than a 500 or whatever photoshop runs for nowadays. i mean you pay the 420 dollar or whatever extra for a few hours saved in time. and you save a lot of hours just having the same type of box.

hey kris, i wish people would come to places with the cool content, but haven’t you realized by now that the blogger world works a lot like MTV? I mean the short 2-3 paragraphs are perfectly suited for our generation’s attention span… which is to say we have no attention span, so i’d think that along with no-attention spans and dubious literacy rates in america, the sites with the "cool" people and "nice" designs are gonna get all the hits. i mean people are looking for ease of use too. XML, XHTML, CSS, DHTML, serverside apps using J2ee, asp, cfm, php, they all help on the backend and all, but fuck it, you need to have gorgeous graphics skills, gorgeous body and face, and the skill to easily quantify and digest long thoughts into easy 1-2 paragraph form.

and everyone has a webcam now. nerds lose again. until next time… in revenge of the nerds XX: we hack your neural implants to make you think we’re cool… finally.

jesus said,

June 11, 2002 @ 11:12 am

Can I get a "DOH!!!" *slaps forehead*

jesus said,

June 11, 2002 @ 11:12 am

Can I get a "DOH!!!" *slaps forehead*

Kris said,

June 11, 2002 @ 12:12 pm

>i have to disagree that a 30 dollar copy of gimp is going to be better than a 500 or whatever photoshop runs for nowadays.

I think that strongly depends on how much you have used Photoshop. I haven’t used much else over the past 7 years, so I know my way with it and I know that around 90% of it I don’t need and 10% rarely need. GIMP makes a very good chance serving that 5 remaining percents.

> the sites with the "cool" people and "nice" designs are gonna get all the hits.

Ofcourse. But just as it goes with popular music, the biggest stars are the ones that are forgotten in less than time. The really good sites stay and have a far larger impact in the long run.
Ow, and what is with all this "cool people" and "nice designs"? Have blogs
become the playgrounds where their owners show off themselves? Clearly, some are meant that way, but the most I know are not that much influenced at all by what you and I think;

Some of my favorites:
http://www.brainstormsandraves.com
http://www.textism.com
http://www.waferbaby.com
unadorned.org/dandruff

Kris said,

June 11, 2002 @ 12:14 pm

100% – 90% – 10% = 5%

I have "uber" math skills :)

Mei Li said,

June 11, 2002 @ 10:59 pm

gawd, you people, shut up. what does it matter? i mean, kim, it’s not your business anyway.you all are just wasting time talking about an issue that can’t be resolved by ur pathetic ideas. oh wellz. none of my business either. u can go on fighting while i watch and laugh at ur stupidity. tsk tsk tsk.

kim said,

June 12, 2002 @ 9:16 am

Why talk about any issues, then, if we take that stance. Why discuss anything? The issue at hand here is much larger than the spat between the two girls, and I think it’s an important one concerning web designers.

If we take that what does it matter anyway idea, then it ends up applying to everything… Why talk about politics? Why stand up for our rights? Why do anything? What’s the point of life?

What’s the importance of anything?

Mei Li said,

June 13, 2002 @ 1:47 am

the importance of everything CAN NEVER be resolved by discussing amongst people who have NO power to change. what does an internet discussion do? change the world. kim, let’s be realistic. that’s not going to work. maybe Ivy was trying to change the world by sueing for copying. By her ONE daring step, she could’ve saved all you so-called web designers. But then again, she decided not to take such an action as a result of Michelle from mywonderful.net’s age. so, don’t think your petty internet discussion does good. it doesn’t AT ALL. kim, you gotta know your place. you are JUST some teenaged designer. i mean if you really think you are all at stake and want to do something RIGHT, why don’t you appeal to your government for law protection which actually have already been issued, just that you haven’t acknowledged and YOU REFUSE TO ACCEPT that copyright laws are available and are NOT a drastic technique to protect your stuff. It’s 99$, how expensive is it? I mean, if you can’t afford that, how did u afford all those designing programs and domain fees? really, you guys just take designing as pastime, it’s not like you’re professionals, so why bother? coz of your anger? coz of your boredom? kim, i’m sure there’s more to you than that.

Kris said,

June 13, 2002 @ 10:18 am

mei-li, for your info, I am a professional webdesigner. And fatalism is something I cannot afford. Obviously you can, so you must be in a whole different kinda business.

laura said,

June 13, 2002 @ 10:54 am

lolz at vu…

"both sites look hella gay "

dave said,

June 13, 2002 @ 1:38 pm

And I’m a professional since 1996. Survivor of two dot-coms, a digital press, and an internet applications company. Before that it was doing proprietary language for a bank.

I’ve used adobe products since version 3.0 of photoshop.. when was that? No clue. But What other application could match it back then? Nothing. What other application can now match the ease of use and streamline and total reliablity and file compatability with any printing press?

gimp? give me a break. as of now, it doesn’t support CMYK. And as Adobe has a stranglehold on the print industry, I doubt it will implement all the different proprietary technologies that Photoshop has, such as pantone color matching, and tight integration with that other big behemoth of program… what is it again? oh yeah adobe illustrator. Lets add the fact that almost every single designer in the world uses adobe products, and I’m talking about professionals here, not linux geeks who work for free. Gimp is an awesome program. But it doesn’t cater to designers, and it doesn’t have a multi-billiondollar company payin artists to make a nice interface, and thus it’s going to be relagated to niche status until something better comes along.

For gimp to gain acceptance, you’re going to need a miraculous change of majority from Wintel to Linux, which isn’t gonna happen unless something better than Os X comes around which will make the clueless designers who can’t work their way around a command prompt if they had a .45 to their temple. Oh, X-windows doesn’t have a command prompt? Oh, what about gnome? Well things will change then linux developers have money to pay money for total compatability with all systems. That’s not gonna happen any time soon (5 years). Maybe in a decade, if and when microsoft dies somehow will you see linux being dominent. but for now, forget it. i’ll stick to my photoshop 7.0

dave said,

June 13, 2002 @ 1:41 pm

in short, i NEED my photoshop. nothing has the user community of actual professionals that has developed tutorials, filters, brushes, (which will spur another generation of "designers" who use adobe products) that photoshop does.

kim said,

June 13, 2002 @ 3:33 pm

You’re missing my point, Mei-Li. I’m not saying that I have the power to change anything; I’m not trying to make a difference but express my opinion on a certain view. Personally, I think that aside from some kinks, the internet is working well as a whole.

My point, however, is that if it’s so idiotic to express one’s views, if it’s so stupid to have a stance on a situation whether it be on design, politics, copyright laws or whatever it may be… then what’s the point about writing about anything?

99.9% of the opinions expressed on the Internet won’t amount to anything on their own. Especially those expressed on personal journals/blogs such as this one. I don’t have any illusions that my blog will make any more difference than any other ones. Does that mean that opinions shouldn’t be made and spoken of unless they’re going to make a difference?

If our world were truly like that, the blog culture itself would probably not exist the way it does today.

Autumn said,

June 13, 2002 @ 7:37 pm

Well, I think Kim’s got a good point about those two other sites. I was in the same boat but not really. As for the site that copied Kim, now, that’s against the copyright code or whatever it is. Because that’s like, the exact same graphic. I’m don’t disagree with anyone here, I just chose to kiss Kim’s butt on this part. Organization smation, I mean, look at it this way. It’s like organizing your room. Who cares if the bed and the desk and the dresser and the TV are in the exact same spot. I use to do that when I was younger, organize my room because I loved my friends rooms so much, but yet I had different things in my room, different furniture, etc. And my friends (or if they weren’t a friend) didn’t care… heh. It’s just a room. Just like a website. Your room, is your own personal space. A long with your website. So, copyright our rooms I guess would be something that we’d have to do. Along with the exact same colors a person paints on their house, yadda yadda yadda. I can ramble forever. : )

Mei Li said,

June 13, 2002 @ 11:10 pm

well then kim, what is ur problem then? if they have copyright lawsuits, is it your problem? no and if Ivy was to take it out on you, she could coz u did steal her images. so if you are really promoting non-copying by discussion, why did you copy her images? please, people don’t be hypocrites, i mean if adobe photoshop costs about 1000$ in where i live, can’t you spend 99$US for copyright laws? well if you say it’s ‘fatal’ to have someone copy ur site, doesn’t Ivy have the right to sue Michelle?

Kim, just in case you don’t realize what you are doing u are
using a specific example of other’s sites, stealing their graphics and then critisizing them. you actually stole and didn’t ask PERMISSION, as to whether you may use them as part of your discussion. is that ethically and politically, right? do u have any rights to steal her her images and then refuse to admit just because you PERCEIVE that you are better than them. the answer, my friends is NO.

And Kim as quoted from you,
"The issue at hand here is much larger than the spat between the two girls, and I think it’s an important one concerning web designers.

What’s the importance of anything?"

You there are implying that your discussion makes a lot of difference as it is IMPORTANT.

how would you know that the internet is working well as a whole? your realm is in teen designing. do you really attempt find other problems on the net such as music copyrights? is it so, that only they, Michelle & Ivy have copy(right) problems. didn’t u? doesn’t a lot of other people? those are problems, the net isn’t one peaceful happy place. aren’t you faced with opposition? is the net "working well"? it sure isn’t working well for you, is it? the internet is created by humankind. what makes the net, is you designers. if you guys aren’t working well, the net isn’t working well. are u feelin’ me?

I’m not talking about professionals at stake, Kim isn’t a professional, Michelle isn’t, Ivy isn’t. I’m talking about teen-pastime designers. they shouldn’t worry about it. and if they do, buy copyright laws altogether. is it THAT difficult to understand? is it THAT complicated that you need to discuss about it? as stated above, in case u didn’t understand for whatever reason, it may be, I said, "it’s not like you’re professionals." implying the fact that professionals SHOULD WORRY ABOUT COPYING and the word, "YOU" denotes, to one person, ie. Kim, not to the anyone else. and it was not implying that you shouldn’t buy adobe. it’s STATING that if it’s an issue, you SHOULD buy copyright laws. so why take offence, people? do you not read carefully?

btw Kim, I’ve noticed your pattern in arguing, everytime you are opposed, you change your argument and try to put the blame on someone else. it’s not an assumption. it’s reality. and i’m not critisizing you to get people to hate you. I’m merely pointing out your flaw in hopes that you may change one day. and don’t change is impossible. Human evolution is possible, what’s a personality change compared to that?

vu said,

June 14, 2002 @ 1:30 am

whoa who’s this laura chick?

a/s/l?

shirt ninJAY said,

June 14, 2002 @ 6:07 am

i don’t care what anyone says, but kim’s talent smokes both aiwei.net and mywonderful.net in web design.

as for whoever’s sueing the other person, i think that’s outrageous. sueing for that is just lame. are you that greedy for money that you’ll go so far to sue someone who "copied" your website?

if you even went to court to file a lawsuit, i wonder what the judge would say.. "wtf is this? get the f out of my court." jk

may i ask where you got your inspiration from? i’m sure you saw that style in another website and make a spinoff and call it your own.

kim makes a good point when she talks about inspiration.. oh yeah, and i agree with what katie says, " think they’re both.. ugly.. so it doesn’t really matter. And if we want to talk about what is copyright… I’m damn sure she didn’t take those pictures herself." but that’s her opinion, so don’t hate on her. everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. especially kim. =)

marz said,

June 14, 2002 @ 6:49 am

to expand on mei li’s point, (which i agree on.. so sue me!) all in all, it means that it’s not right to be the advocate of the internet. why do you bother? if you made an argument about something in which someone opposes you, then why do you take it to heart to the point where the whole argument changes? there is no such thing as one side in an argument. there is always two.

if you can’t take that, kim, then i suggest that you talk to a wall or something — because that way it will agree with you.

i never intended to flame you. i was annoyed at the fact that you changed the argument after each time people opposed you. you’re not always right. remember that. and this time, no offence, in my opinion.. you’re NOT.

and shirt ninJAY, of course kim is entitled to her own opinions. she’s got this blog, right? so opposing opinions doesn’t mean that our argument is that she can’t express her own. maybe if she looked at all perspectives instead of her own (and only her own) the argument wouldn’t change and become so childish.

so yes, go mei li.

Kris said,

June 14, 2002 @ 4:28 pm

dave:
For the few things I do at home, Photoshop is too expensive. Sure, I can get some dubiously obtained version within the time i need to type this message, but I don’t want it anymore, not like that. So I thought (*thought* because I haven’t actually seen GIMP work yet, there is no trial version either which bothers me a lot) GIMP is a good alternative. I agree with you completely as GIMP not being a viable alternative to Photoshop for doing serious graphic work. The things I do at home are not meant for making money, nor are they really serious. If I ever become a freelancer, or my company buys a license for me to use PS7, I will be very happy ofcourse, though the level of seriousness of my home-made cooking may still remain the same.

Mei Li:
>using a specific example of other’s sites, stealing their graphics and then critisizing them. you actually stole and didn’t ask PERMISSION, as to whether you may use them as part of your discussion. is that ethically and politically, right?

You don’t have to ask permission to discuss something. Illustrating that with a screenshot of the sites (and not even actual size, no, small ones) is perfectly valid.

>do u have any rights to steal her her images

Which she doesn’t…

> and then refuse to admit just because you PERCEIVE that you are better than them. the answer, my friends is NO.

It is not even about "being better", it is about having a professional attitude or not, or, if you wish, having some decency.

>You there are implying that your discussion makes a lot of difference as it is IMPORTANT.

It is. Awareness is important, even for teenage past-time designers (as you so tactfully put it, a few lines later). Those that aspire a professional career should learn, understand and acquire as much as they can that helps them in becoming professionals. Honoring copyright is just one of the many things pros are expected to do.

>do you really attempt find other problems on the net such as music copyrights?

Copyright regulations are a very universal thing. Copyright regulations that concern the field in which you seek a career are worth a thought in particular.

>is it so, that only they, Michelle & Ivy have copy(right) problems. didn’t u? doesn’t a lot of other people?

If people who claim to be webdesigners take their claim seriously, then discussing these matters is a necessity.

those are problems, the net isn’t one peaceful happy place. aren’t you faced with opposition? is the net "working well"? it sure isn’t working well for you, is it?

So we should all let it be like it is? The internet is a thing we don’t have any influence on at all? That contradicts the things you say next:

>the internet is created by humankind. what makes the net, is you designers. if you guys aren’t working well, the net isn’t working well. are u feelin’ me?

Finally, something we agree on.

>I’m not talking about professionals at stake, Kim isn’t a professional, Michelle isn’t, Ivy isn’t.

Well, how do you know? Whether or not you are a professional, you are sure to display a higher level of professionalism if you obtain a certain mentality of what you should and should not do if you were a designer.

>I’m talking about teen-pastime designers. they shouldn’t worry about it.

Hell yeah they should! Stealing is stealing, and you can bet on it that potential clients, employers and the BSA will have a second thought about you when ever confronted.

>and if they do, buy copyright laws altogether.

You don’t have to "buy copyright" to have it. Me thinks you are confusing copyright with patent.

Marz:
>all in all, it means that it’s not right to be the advocate of the internet.

Woo. One makes a stand, a righteous one, and immediatly one is branded as "the advocate of the internet". Think about what you just said. The internet is a medium, not a person, it plain IS, it doesn’t need to be defended. A pledge however for what is right or wrong, or more specifically what is a professional attitude and what is not, is something worth advocating. Tell us your side of the story Marz, if you have one.

>why do you bother? if you made an argument about something in which someone opposes you, then why do you take it to heart to the point where the whole argument changes? there is no such thing as one side in an argument. there is always two.

Ofcourse. And if you drop the whole subject, as Mei Li (and you, since you claim to agree with her) proposes, you have zero sides of the story left; end of story. Argument leads to discussion, discussion leads to insight, insight leads to wisdom, wisdom leads to license for carrying a light saber.

>if you can’t take that, kim, then i suggest that you talk to a wall or something.

She does. It is called a blog.

dave: said,

June 14, 2002 @ 5:01 pm

kris:
i do freelance, and i need the power of ps7… i’m just heckling you about the photoshop thing, i do agree with you on all your points,

everyone else:

what is this 99 dollars for US copyright laws? The price of copyright protrction and basic rights as citizens is free here in the US. You automatically receive automatic protection of your intellectual capital. And a patent costs a bit more than 99 dollars I believe.

btw, as someone else repeated before, who took those pictures of those models? I mean if Kim gets to receive criticism, wouldn’t it be forthright to call those two websites authors BOTH dumb bitches who are obviously ammateurs.

shirt ninJAY said,

June 15, 2002 @ 4:02 am

> Argument leads to discussion, discussion leads to insight, insight leads to wisdom, wisdom leads to license for carrying a light saber.

> I mean if Kim gets to receive criticism, wouldn’t it be forthright to call those two websites authors BOTH dumb bitches who are obviously ammateurs.

Hehehe.. both dave and kris rock.

RSS feed for comments on this post

Leave a Comment