> 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.

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.

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.

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.

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. =)

a/s/l?

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?

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.