These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Alliance Logos & You - Clarification on submissions

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fredlah
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#201 - 2014-02-15 02:56:44 UTC
I love this. If people thought goons were bad enough already, now they have lawyerswarm to picture... fatbee with a suit and a briefcase, anybody?
Arkady Romanov
Whole Squid
#202 - 2014-02-15 03:03:25 UTC
Fredlah wrote:
I love this. If people thought goons were bad enough already, now they have lawyerswarm to picture... fatbee with a suit and a briefcase, anybody?



It's been done

Whole Squid: Get Inked.
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#203 - 2014-02-15 04:58:00 UTC
Arkady Romanov wrote:
Darius JOHNSON wrote:

Explain to me more please I'd like to understand a bit more about CCP's decision-making process and given that I worked there for four years and you're just a bad-posting zilch with no insight whatesoever I'm super curious what I've obviously missed being on the inside while you were doing precisely **** of any value.

I'll let you in on something that's not secret at all you just don't know it because you're stupid... it has nothing to do with resources and everything to do with the fact that the game can't handle what it has now on a large scale. There are certainly creative ways to help mitigate that but at the end of the day ship bling isn't as important as the game actually running you stupid stupid person.

Now I realize that, having done nothing of any consequence ever, you don't have any skin in this game but those of us who have created something aren't going to hand it over to CCP simply because they demand their princely rights, nevermind the fact that they're not entitled to it. Maybe you'll understand at some point in the future if you ever pull yourself out of nothingville and build something other than a list of awful posts on the internet.

- The Honourable Darius "Matlock" JOHNSON esq.



When you said princely rights, the first thing I thought of was Primae Noctis.


My thoughts on the 'Princely rights" was a flash of memory from when I watched 'Brave Heart' and that duke guy wanted to bed his wife.

Oops now ccp has 'Brave Heart' in their IP. What?
Darius JOHNSON
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#204 - 2014-02-15 05:35:32 UTC
Tuttomenui II wrote:
Arkady Romanov wrote:
Darius JOHNSON wrote:

Explain to me more please I'd like to understand a bit more about CCP's decision-making process and given that I worked there for four years and you're just a bad-posting zilch with no insight whatesoever I'm super curious what I've obviously missed being on the inside while you were doing precisely **** of any value.

I'll let you in on something that's not secret at all you just don't know it because you're stupid... it has nothing to do with resources and everything to do with the fact that the game can't handle what it has now on a large scale. There are certainly creative ways to help mitigate that but at the end of the day ship bling isn't as important as the game actually running you stupid stupid person.

Now I realize that, having done nothing of any consequence ever, you don't have any skin in this game but those of us who have created something aren't going to hand it over to CCP simply because they demand their princely rights, nevermind the fact that they're not entitled to it. Maybe you'll understand at some point in the future if you ever pull yourself out of nothingville and build something other than a list of awful posts on the internet.

- The Honourable Darius "Matlock" JOHNSON esq.



When you said princely rights, the first thing I thought of was Primae Noctis.


My thoughts on the 'Princely rights" was a flash of memory from when I watched 'Brave Heart' and that duke guy wanted to bed his wife.

Oops now ccp has 'Brave Heart' in their IP. What?


FYI that's what Primae Notcis was
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#205 - 2014-02-15 05:55:48 UTC
I'm not a lawyer and I'm not going to pretend to be a lawyer. I'll only note that when Facebook is being more subtle and more considerate of its users' rights than you are, you should perhaps reconsider your policy.

Otherwise, a recent post by Issler Dainze gives me a wonderful test case for your new policy: You have a large, successful in-game alliance, run by a former CSM, called "The Honda Accord." Go.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Nokegi
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#206 - 2014-02-15 08:26:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Nokegi
Never mind Facebook - whenever CCP distributes EVE they are shipping the Python interpreter, the Chromium browser, and other open source libraries. Those libraries are not owned by CCP, but are distributed under an appropriate license, so there is no problem with redistributing them.

I don't know anything about Icelandic law, so there could be a reason the same principle doesn't apply to alliance logos, but it would be nice to have an explanation of what.

EDIT: and that's a crazy license. Alliances have the right to use the logos they created only to defray costs, and only for "CLOTHING, HOUSEWARES, AND OTHER CONSUMER ITEMS DISPLAYING THE LICENSED PROPERTY". The first part seems to forbid making a profit from the logo; not that there's much reason for an alliance to do that, but that would usually be its own business. The second part is more drastic - if you want to, say, display the logo on your alliance website, too bad, that's not covered, since it's not a consumer item!
Darius JOHNSON
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#207 - 2014-02-15 09:13:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Darius JOHNSON
Nokegi wrote:
Never mind Facebook - whenever CCP distributes EVE they are shipping the Python interpreter, the Chromium browser, and other open source libraries. Those libraries are not owned by CCP, but are distributed under an appropriate license, so there is no problem with redistributing them.

I don't know anything about Icelandic law, so there could be a reason the same principle doesn't apply to alliance logos, but it would be nice to have an explanation of what.

EDIT: and that's a crazy license. Alliances have the right to use the logos they created only to defray costs, and only for "CLOTHING, HOUSEWARES, AND OTHER CONSUMER ITEMS DISPLAYING THE LICENSED PROPERTY". The first part seems to forbid making a profit from the logo; not that there's much reason for an alliance to do that, but that would usually be its own business. The second part is more drastic - if you want to, say, display the logo on your alliance website, too bad, that's not covered, since it's not a consumer item!


Icelandic law doesn't matter. The only IP law that matters is the law of whatever country you live in. This is a land grab and anyone who signs that agreement is as dumb as dogshit.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#208 - 2014-02-15 12:42:49 UTC
Arkady Romanov wrote:
Fredlah wrote:
I love this. If people thought goons were bad enough already, now they have lawyerswarm to picture... fatbee with a suit and a briefcase, anybody?



It's been done


You god damn fool. You linked that on CCP's forums? They own that now.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Arkady Romanov
Whole Squid
#209 - 2014-02-15 13:06:42 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
Arkady Romanov wrote:
Fredlah wrote:
I love this. If people thought goons were bad enough already, now they have lawyerswarm to picture... fatbee with a suit and a briefcase, anybody?



It's been done


You god damn fool. You linked that on CCP's forums? They own that now.




NNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooo!!!!


STELLLAAAA! KHAAAANNNN!!!

Whole Squid: Get Inked.
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE
#210 - 2014-02-15 18:54:50 UTC
/Not a Lawyer

....so I am pseudo-following this whole discussion. What Darius brought up were some good points. If they want to bring up an Alliance name in a movie or something, they need to pay players for their creativity. Otherwise a can of "Koke" it will be.

Thanks to all those with Law Degrees getting involved. I am sure it will be solved to both parties liking. Straight Hopefully?


So my question is to all of you:

I should hold off on submitting my Alliance's logo right?

2nd Question:

What about an answer being some sort of reciprocity agreement? CCP allows EVE logo usage an players allow Alliance logo usage? Would that be fair?
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#211 - 2014-02-15 19:06:55 UTC
what of any support work relating to the logo? I.E iterations of the design. are these covered by the policy ?
can i continue to iterate upon them for use in another artistic capacity such as personal artwork or are they associated with the piece now belonging to ccp?

how far from the aproved design would another piece need to be to avoid any potential conflict?

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#212 - 2014-02-16 06:35:48 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
what of any support work relating to the logo? I.E iterations of the design. are these covered by the policy ?
can i continue to iterate upon them for use in another artistic capacity such as personal artwork or are they associated with the piece now belonging to ccp?

how far from the aproved design would another piece need to be to avoid any potential conflict?

There's no ******* point in even talking about this. They don't own the work. They will never own the work.

Also **** anyone who signs the agreement hereby legitimizing CCP's bullshit.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Darius JOHNSON
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#213 - 2014-02-16 08:43:28 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
what of any support work relating to the logo? I.E iterations of the design. are these covered by the policy ?
can i continue to iterate upon them for use in another artistic capacity such as personal artwork or are they associated with the piece now belonging to ccp?

how far from the aproved design would another piece need to be to avoid any potential conflict?

There's no ******* point in even talking about this. They don't own the work. They will never own the work.

Also **** anyone who signs the agreement hereby legitimizing CCP's bullshit.


Anyone signing the agreement is actually signing away their work. Prior to that it's still theirs. CCP stomping their feet and claiming the sky is black doesn't make the sky black.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#214 - 2014-02-16 09:03:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
what of any support work relating to the logo? I.E iterations of the design. are these covered by the policy ?
can i continue to iterate upon them for use in another artistic capacity such as personal artwork or are they associated with the piece now belonging to ccp?

how far from the aproved design would another piece need to be to avoid any potential conflict?

There's no ******* point in even talking about this. They don't own the work. They will never own the work.

Also **** anyone who signs the agreement hereby legitimizing CCP's bullshit.

yes they do,by submitting the work you are given it to them, what id like to know is how much ,if any of he support work which is by its nature going to infringe upon the finished piece ,is covered by the arrangement , its fairly common for the entire process behind a piece to be considered part of the whole and to be sold along with it (under copyright), this is often the case with conceptual work relating to film and in particular animation.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#215 - 2014-02-16 09:30:30 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
what of any support work relating to the logo? I.E iterations of the design. are these covered by the policy ?
can i continue to iterate upon them for use in another artistic capacity such as personal artwork or are they associated with the piece now belonging to ccp?

how far from the aproved design would another piece need to be to avoid any potential conflict?

There's no ******* point in even talking about this. They don't own the work. They will never own the work.

Also **** anyone who signs the agreement hereby legitimizing CCP's bullshit.

yes they do,by submitting the work you are given it to them,

Giving what? Do you actually know what we're talking about? I seems given your reply that you don't.

Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
what id like to know is how much ,if any of he support work which is by its nature going to infringe upon the finished piece

It doesn't matter considering CCP doesn't own the original unless you sign their stupid agreement.

Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
,is covered by the arrangement , its fairly common for the entire process behind a piece to be considered part of the whole and to be sold along with it (under copyright), this is often the case with conceptual work relating to film and in particular animation.

Yeah, whatever. Again, why are we talking about this?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#216 - 2014-02-16 09:42:36 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

Frightened angry words

we are talking about it because it is the reality,we are talking about volunteering art assets, Not a commission piece.
my question was with regards those who left the tinfoil at home and agreed to this.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#217 - 2014-02-16 09:48:47 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
There's nothing tinfoil about a company making a blatant and unnecessary grab at its clients' intellectual properties.

Does Microsoft own a book because you wrote it in Word? Does Adobe own my company's logo because Photoshop was involved in the process? Does Google own my video because I posted it on YouTube for my friends to see?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#218 - 2014-02-16 09:56:45 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
unnecessary

read the blog

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#219 - 2014-02-16 11:11:03 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
unnecessary

read the blog

the blog is wrong, idiot

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#220 - 2014-02-16 11:11:11 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
unnecessary

read the blog


If you Reply to this reply to your reply to his reply, You agree to transfer ownership of your first born to me. I need a mining slave.

^^ There is a point in there somewhere if your intuitive enough to realize it.