eh wtf, asdfaewrdddd... i know, right? Options

[emberfly]

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

[synatribe]

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

[ersatz]

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.

[Tung]

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.

[Melissa]

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

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

[synatribe]

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

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

[synatribe]

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

[heyo-captain-jac...]

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.

[pandora]

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."

[synatribe]

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.

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

[pandora]

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.

[pandora]

Topic moved to Resolved Feedback.

[superstitious]

Per discussion - reopened and moved back to Feedback

[Tung]

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

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.

[ersatz]

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

[micron]

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.

[Tung]

^ 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.

[micron]

^ 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.

[ersatz]

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...

[Lanochka]

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.

[ersatz]

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...

[micron]

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...

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.

[Just_Dream]

like i said, ideally she should have credited them for inspiration. this whole fiasco could have been avoided had she credited them.

the concept isnt original from the get go, and deserves no "credit."

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."

[Elba]

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.

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

[rnicron]

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.