Pandora.. this makes me laugh :o

I know it was removed, but.....


hypocrite ouch | how could you

Is this not exactly like the Hollister Co. situation? Atleast I credited them


edit//

oh my god i can't breathe. make the laughter stopppp

its not even the same, just familiar, Pandora has statue of liberty, that site dosent and the buildings are different

Alright, I'm not one to start crap, but seriously; that is almost exactly the same. You can't even say that.

The buildings might not look exactly the same, but the concept and the dirt looks practically the same. If that's not jocking then I don't know what is. I won't say any judgments on this matter, until Trish explains herself.

Kevinjo,

I think even this crosses the line of being similar, inspirational, and or photogenic memory.

This is a clear rip-off from 10 Volt Media, so I understand why the layout has and would have been removed. But as her being a head staff moderator, I think that this falls even in the same category of what Mike was doing. Is this what the members of cb are supposed to look up to?

Clearly, some consequence must be derived from this, the layouts may not be exact, but come on, if you do not see the countless similarities between the two...

I agree with Tung. Trish has an obligation to the staff, and the members that she claimed to have made this layout herself, why.

I hope this isn't how you judge how far you're willing to take someone else's ideas into your own graphics...

well that is true , I was actually on her website and while I was browsing through wordpress themes, I found the exaact same one on design disease http://www.wp-themes.designdisease.com/testrun/
and she didnt have the credit, I was shocked, but who knows until her explantaion

aghhh, scratch what I said in the very beginning, I agree

You can edit your posts, no need to double post.

I will say this however, we cannot bring her personal website into these manners, because she did say that she did not make that herself, that it was a template, because she doesn't have the time to make one herself.

I don't think Trish would have jocked this.
But theres always that chance.

Care to explain, Trish? I refuse to point fingers, but I would like to know whats happening here.

god i am so sick of explaining this; that background is a stock graphic from vectorstock and on the preview its used the same exact way. the concept isnt original from the get go, and deserves no "credit."

oo, I never knew but like emberfly, I was browsing and I saw that, ehh whatever now I know :]

yeah sorry, not gonna "explain myself" for using a concept that's been practically beaten to death. that's like saying roxanne jocked her portfolio layout from this guy

concepts are reused and recycled by designers everywhere; everyone just take a damned chill pill.

Topic moved to Resolved Feedback.

Per discussion - reopened and moved back to Feedback

That's true that concepts are reused and recycled. But the layout submitted just really look too identical. I mean reused and recycled concepts usually have bits and parts of ideas from layouts and inspirations. But the way it was constructed, almost EVERYTHING was reused. The picture of the building is on top of the page, with the brown dirty layering right under it with the rest of the layout. You could've been more creative and added other things to it, but you didn't. Everything was simply the same with a little changes to the pictures used. I don't know that's just my opinion, but I get where you're getting at though Trish about the concepts thing though.

Would it be possible to post this original all-ideas-like-this-come-from-me image that you're talking about?

hi guys,

i explained this already privately via pm to those that notified me. but here is my view on this matter.

from my standpoint this doesn't constitute "jocking". i agree that the two look VERY similar but if you look more closely, the graphics are all original. it's obviously a derivative work, but not a copyright violation. ideally, what Trish should have done was credit them for "inspiration", but in Trish's defence, derivative works are very common on the web (and even in real life). "jocking" is when you rip off someone else's work as your own, but in this case, all code + graphics are original.

^ That makes sense, and understandable. I just hope that this won't make people submit layouts that look similar to one another with just a little graphic changes, and few different codings because that would just ruin the quality of originality of layouts cB have.

^ i guess your not understanding my point.

the graphics weren't "modified" - they are orignal works using a similar concept. and the code is all original, as it was designed specifically for createblog layouts.

edit;
for those you are having a hard time understanding my point: think fashion. in the fashion industry, derivative works are very common. yet none are accused of copyright infrigement - its understood that derivatives are part of the industry. its like wise with the web.

We know they weren't modified, it's just...inspiration is one thing. She might as well have modified the original, because it looks exactly the same. Concept borrowing is fine and dandy, but at least change the colors, placement, overalll layout...anything...nothing was really changed, just remade. What's the point of that...

But isn't this what some other members do? I know I've seen tons of redesigned layouts such as a redesign of PureVolume.com in myspace layout form. A screen shot of Itunes which simple text boxes in it. Etc. They're both inspired in a way. I don't see how this is any different.

Those people stated it was a redesign of a popular website for the use of others because they're entertained by it. This is her saying, "I made this, I designed it," when really, whoever made the layout for that company did, and it's not at all the same thing...

like i said, ideally she should have credited them for inspiration. this whole fiasco could have been avoided had she credited them. but as far as the originality of code + images - they are original.

What we're trying to say is that she SHOULD have given credit, but she said that it deserves no credit. WTF. Of course it deserves credit, Even if it's "inspiration."

Anyone else remember Trish coming into the chat saying that Roxanne jocked her portfolio layout? LMAO.

The fact is, she won't own up to what she did was wrong. She called out Emberfly (oh god) when he screenshoted the Hollister Co. website layout and disqualified him from running for ___ of the Month even though he coded his own stuff. She also kicked Mike (oh god, again) off staff for blatantly stealing stuff from Deviantart. So since she's friends with you Jusun, this is acceptable, and she just needs a talking to? I don't think so.

Yea I was there. Then she said something like "I don't want to call Roxanne out on it, but the concept is the same, even though she has a different vector" blah blah blah. But she made it into a big deal.

And just in case anyone missed this on the last page:


What we're trying to say is that she SHOULD have given credit, but she said that it deserves no credit. WTF. Of course it deserves credit, Even if it's "inspiration."

Everyone already knows that Trish is a hypocrite. She also lies out the ass. Do you want her to admit it or something? You know she won't; she'd rather us speculate and send out other staff to defend her while she bitches about it Backstage.

Sorry, I must have high expectations for a Head Staff moderator, let alone a People Staff moderator, to at least respond a few times to feedback regarding them.

Ok, so in an attempt to make this objective, where is the line drawn between "inspiration" and overall concept emulation? Meaning, at what point does credit become necessary? I'm not talking about things that are obvious, like using someone's DA image. I'm talking about complete or even a quasi redo of someone else's design concept. Do you credit them even if you believe that concept has existed before?

She used almost exactly the same images. The dirt brown part that was used for the background of the blog was identical and the buildings looked exactly the same. It doesn't matter if it existed before, it was damn near the same thing.

Meaning the outline/shapes are different, but the patters are the same. Also, just because this is brought up, she takes the layout down? That makes no sense. If it's been "beaten to death" and she's oh so right, then she shouldn't have taken it down.

It'd be nice if she wouldn't have just ran and deleted it right as the topic surfaced, but I guess she's good at that. It's her defense, just like avoiding things is.

Damnit, Christina edited with what I said.

Ok guys, I get that you don't agree with the way she has (or hasn't) handled this. I'd really like to see some feedback regarding the use of design concepts (including similar image concepts) and how far it should go, in your (public) opinion before needing permission and/or credit.

I've taken a closer look at the dirt, and it's EXACTLY the same. Micron said it's original, but it isn't. She reversed the original dirt image around. Also here's a close up of how they are exactly the same for proof. Take a close look at the shape of the DARK BROWN parts and they match up nicely. Trish version I didn't have a nice quality of it, so it's a little blurry but you can easily tell they are the same image. So that's why I think crediting 10volt was necessary.

Trish's

10Volt



Game over.

Ok, so obviously using the same image is call for credit.

and to a degree, it should just be common sense for the designer to know when something should be credited.

^Especially with the jobs she does. She should know better.

Look at the menu, the black bar separating the top image and the body. What a coincidence that there's a menu on both.


And I don't think "coding" should be involved. cB profile needs a unique kind of coding to make everything work. Of course you can't just copy that from Volt. That's why coding should not matter, as we're discussing how the way the layout is arranged and copied visually.

Eh, I hate to say it but you're right that if you look at both pictures specifically at the dirt, that part is seriously exactly the same just flipped. Too similar to be a coincidence. =(

Too similar to not have a consequence...

^^ agreed, but if trish loses her status on staff wont that only make situations more difficult behind the scenes? because isnt she really involoved with createblog and micron?

^That shouldn't be the focus of it.

I don't think she's involved with micron. Micron has a girlfriend or wife in real life I think.

Even if she loses her status on staff, she'll still secretly be a mentor again, and we might see her back on staff 5/6 days later. Good call, Tung. And also, the menu as well!


Yea well, things don't always work out that way.

And even if she was involved, I don't think she should get special privileges just because of that.

Well, the big shining difference here would be that this is not a layout that is being distributed here. If it was, that would pose a big problem and have the potential of getting CB in trouble. That was the issue with Mike.

This was a layout used for her personal profile, and while I still don't agree with the concept of using another person's work without permission even for personal use; I do have to make the argument that this is not the same situation as when Mike was under question.

edit; Also, I'm not trying to say that anything or nothing will happen. I'm just adding to the discussion at this point, so don't take my word as being final.

lol no I meant dosent she work with him. lol ,but its already been anserwed :]

Ohh sorry me. I thought you meant they were involved like relationship-wise involved. *smacks head*

Anyways, EVERYONE on staff works with micron to make this site better and run smoothly I guess, not just her.