Okay. I don't know if any of you have heard of Full Tilt Poker... but I play it. And i realized I need a cool signature for the forums. There is this dude that has started a thread making them for everybody, but I think my ol' friends down here at PSC could do a much better job! Could you guys (just for fun, if you want to) post some signatures I might be able to use? Thanks!

Here is the link to that guy (Raddow) I was talking about:
http://pokerforums.fulltiltpoker.com/viewtopic.php?t=46999&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Here is what I asked for him to give me:

Stewie (family guy) holding/throwing/hiding [something cool] two Kings/Aces.
also "run2home93"
- Full Tilt logo?

Here is what I have done... SO FAR, on my own:




I'd really like to see this spread get active, because I do want to see all of your potentials, (and have a kick-@$$ sig.!). Let's out-photoshop Raddow. WHO'S WITH ME?

P.S. I already have a few ideas to change. Let's see if you guys say the same thing.
P.P.S. Some of you might have noticed my on-going Family Guy trend? yes, I am very addicted

looks good to me run. idea why not change the plain b/g to a casino type atmosphere? blurr it etc instead of the grey? just a thought.
-m-

Your design is horrible and you should feel bad for asking professionals to work for free.

Also

You enjoy using trademark characters to identify yourself...

In that case I have a swell idea for you...



That should look dead good.

If you intend to use Stewie Griffin it has to be an artists impression.

I doubt you are willing to pay for that.

Just another person who wants free stuff.

(Cough, the kind of person who doesn't buy a licence for Photoshop, cough...)

I hope you are using The Gimp for this kind of work and got permission to use Stewie.

Its for personal use with no profit, he's within his rights to use it.

Easy with the coke art work marx, thats one of the highest guarded logo's in the world

How can anybody be as WRONG as you?

Imagine me with a blank face saying the following...

(If you are having trouble imagining me with a blank face this might help.)


"Since when is PUBLICISING anything personal use."

If your having trouble with the concept of: Attaching other peoples work as a representative/advertising symbol/icon of you on a public forum is inherently an infringement of 3 separate pieces of legislation, then maybe this will help.

- Creative Rights (©, ™: These rights are automatically assigned to the creator, there are some exceptions like if the person is under the employment of somebody. Fair use is the only way to use these, otherwise, hands off the panda.)
- Trademark Law (©, ™,® & ℠: Fair use is the only way to use these, otherwise, hands off the panda.)
- The DMCA (©,™,® & ℠: Fair use is the only way to use these, otherwise, hands off the panda.).


He is -by FAR- way over the line where his rights are concerned as to what to do with a companies character.

Stewie Griffin:
- Created by Seth MacFarlane
- Voiced by Seth MacFarlane
- The intellectual property of Seth MacFarlane.
- Licensed to Fox, Cartoon Network, TBS...

Does he have a license to use him, probably not.

Here is what happens when you don't own a character and you use him...
At the very least, you could will be ordered to stop infringing on the trademark. You could also be ordered to pay damages, for example by handing over any profits or remunerating for losses caused. Either way it's a blemish on what was a clean record.
So is Fair Use; Private use?

No

Even if it was, Fair Use covers: Commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship.

A Signature Image is a COMMERCIAL PURPOSE! FFS

It's advertising who you are!


I fucking despair, I really do.

Fair use is a legal gray area (grey for you Marx, your across the pond )that refers to exceptions in the rights of copyright holders and allows for limited use of copyrighted material, even without permission. However, the conditions in which fair use can be claimed are not set in stone and depend upon four factors:
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.

In short, using short, attributed snippets of a piece for the purpose of commentary or education is generally considered fair use. However, reprinting an entire work without attribution for the purpose of self-promotion or profit isn’t. The shorter the amount copied and the more it is for the purpose of commentary or education, the more likely it is to be deemed fair use.


His image would be considered a disertation of the original image, falling under educational use.

His work is widley spred out over the internet, giving it a sense of public domain. Because they failed to keep a leash on there protected work.

It is used for personal use with no personal gain.

No direct effect for market damage for using this as a avatar for a poker game.

Resolution is way to low to be considered dangerous for reproduction.

No way on gods green earth anything would ever come of this. You could pesonally email
Seth MacFarlane about this, and not a damn thing will ever happen.

His image is being used in the public domain. No way anyone could prove that he made it, no lawyer on earth would take a case for this.

Slow blink...
I don't need to write a letter to Seth...

I can flag it as DMCA infringement right now if I wanted to, Procyon would have no choice but to remove it pending a counter-notice, anybody can DMCA on behalf of the copyright holder... This problem has plagued YouTube for 3 years.

The DMCA is a piece of American legislation.

"His work is widley spred out over the internet, giving it a sense of public domain"
That's not a defence.

"His image would be considered a disertation of the original image, falling under educational use"

No.

It's an Advertised Signature.

'Plagiarism is defined in dictionaries as "the wrongful appropriation, close imitation, or purloining and publication, of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions, and the representation of them as one's own original work."'

You can't get any more...
"...the wrongful appropriation, close imitation, or purloining and publication, of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions, and the representation of them as one's own original work."
...than by sticking it as something that SIGNIFIES you... A SIGNATURE IMAGE.
A SIGNATURE IMAGE ON A FORUM FREQUENTED BY THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE.

I don't think the original copyright holder would have problem with the free advertising. Doesn't change the fact that every post he makes will be affiliated with Family guy...

I think Seth might have a problem with that, if he disagrees with what's being said...
Kind of like how corporations sack individuals they don't want to be affiliated with.

It worries me that you have such a flimsy grasp over copyright legislation.

Fair Use hasn't been a grey area since 2000, when the DMCA came into force.

Flag it, I will LMFAO. They will shut this whole site down after looking at it.

Marx is right about the laws, but the gray area comes into play also. Honestly Marx, in your opinon do you really think any actions will come of his image?

If you want to play the DMCA game, I could flag any original image you post like your logo, and it would be removed, then you would have to counter it and prove its yours to get it re established.

Thats the problem with DMCA.

You can call my character into question. I've had 3 actions in the last 3 years, one against me. 2 I initiated.

Against me were some shady lawyers representing Ford motor company so they claimed. Stating my works had created finacial damages for ford. After a call to Ford's. I bought my licensing rights for 10k. End of story on that 1.

Other 2 were for artwork I had made for a sign company who took it to another company and had it printed. I won both those.

I charge no design fee, with this loop hole I own the rights to everything I design for anybody unless I sign the rights away. Not that I enforece this at all.

Its a shady world Marx, sooner or later your gonna end up in the gray area. Mark my words, your time is coming. Either in the form that you created something that some one feels pushed the limits (probably with out you even knowing) or you will see a design or idea of yours someone else is using.

That image is referenced for literally 'humorous and educational' purposes, I am not affiliated with Coca-Cola nor am I pretending to be.

"Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create a new version of that work. Accordingly, you cannot claim copyright to another’s work, no matter how much you change it, unless you have the owner’s consent."

This is set in stone.
http://www.publaw.com/copyright/

You cannot make a derivation without permission to do so, which is why I design logos in isolation from the Internet using BrainStorming...
Because I can show the reasons behind designing it and it cannot be a derivation, if they can prove reasonable influential exposure I am sunk. But I won't be intentionally trying to infringe popular brands.