Splitcoaststampers.com - the world's #1 papercrafting community
You're currently viewing Splitcoaststampers as a GUEST. We pride ourselves on being great hosts, but guests have limited access to some of our incredible artwork, our lively forums and other super cool features of the site! You can join our incredible papercrafting community at NO COST. So what are you waiting for?
I've noticed what appear to be SU! images in some stamper's watermarks. Now I found this a little ironic. It looks to me like in an attempt to keep people from stealing their work, they are stealing SU!'s work. Do I understand the issues here? Is it okay to use copyrighted images in a personal watermark? Are you all sick of the whole watermark discussion? Are you annoyed that I brought it up again?
Splitcoast Dirty Dozen Alumni VSN Go to Girl Pretty, Pretty Princess
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Suffolk, VA
Posts: 23,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargirl
I've noticed what appear to be SU! images in some stamper's watermarks. Now I found this a little ironic. It looks to me like in an attempt to keep people from stealing their work, they are stealing SU!'s work. Do I understand the issues here? Is it okay to use copyrighted images in a personal watermark? Are you all sick of the whole watermark discussion? Are you annoyed that I brought it up again?
I don't have an answer but you made me laugh, thanks!
I've noticed what appear to be SU! images in some stamper's watermarks. Now I found this a little ironic. It looks to me like in an attempt to keep people from stealing their work, they are stealing SU!'s work. Do I understand the issues here? Is it okay to use copyrighted images in a personal watermark? Are you all sick of the whole watermark discussion? Are you annoyed that I brought it up again?
I haven't seen it, but I think it's both ironic and comical!
Are they exact or a variation, I guess is where the fine line is. If they are exact, then that would be a problem. If they are similar, then it's probably problem free. After all there are similar images in most of the other stamping catalogs, too.
It all comes down to the reason for the watermarks to begin with, I think. If there wasn't a lifting problem, it wouldn't be prime for such discussion, ykwim?
Valerie, I can't be 100% certain, and I did not write down who it was because I specifically did not want to remember! Now when someone asks me who, I can honestly say, "I don't know!" However, I've been a SU! demo for seven years, and I'm fairly certain it's an exact image.
I think I know which watermark stargirl is referencing - and it's exact. It's lovely, but an exact copy. I TOTALLY understand the reason for having watermarks (isn't it unfortunate that folks have to use them in the first place?), but we all do need to make sure we don't copy SU images or each other's designs for our watermarks. Some of our more creative counterparts have made their watermarks as lovely as their cards!
I'm pretty much assuming that they simply didn't think it through, or just don't know it's a violation. I mean really, if they knew, would they have it out there for God and everyone to see?
I think I know which card you're talking about, and if it is the same one, then while it looks identical, it is still *slightly* different. Which of course is not to say that she didn't just copy the image anyway and just alter it a little. But it's almost a dead-on copy. You have yo look reeeeeally carefully to see the differences! Maybe since she altered it a little, she felt like it was OK? I don't know. But I do think that it's wrong, regardless. A *gorgeous* watermark! But still wrong. :(
okay, i'm a little dense; what's a watermark? and how does it infringe on the copyright? sorry if i'm a little slow here...
__________________ mommy to 3 handsome boys and a beautiful little princess!! michael 11/8/96, samuel 10/25/01, brandon 6/16/05, and olivia 7/12/07 (-16)
Location: Where the water meets the sand in So Cali
Posts: 1,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay....so this got me to thinking since I use an image in my watermark. I use a flower image that looks like a flower from SU!'s hostess set, Island Blossoms. SU!'s is a 5 point flower, mine is a 6 point. Mine is actually a flower from a font set called, "saru's Flower Ding". So maybe someone got a dingbat font that has an image in it similar to a SU! one and doesn't know that's what it is.
Maybe I am dense (and I make watermarks!), but how would they even get the SU image into a watermark? I would definitely give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they're using an image that's very similar. I've had customers ask for a watermark with an image that is "similar" to such and such stamp from SU or wherever... but all I do is search for a free dingbat font that is sorta, kinda like the SU stamp. There's nothing wrong with that! :-)
Location: Where the water meets the sand in So Cali
Posts: 1,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could scan an image out of a catalog if you really wanted to. I'm pretty decent with my photo software and could do some really damaging things should I let my evil side out!
It's KILLING me, because now I really want to see the image. ANOTHER thing that can be done, when you're looking @ an image on your computer screen and you know how you can "right click" and save the image? Well....most places are using the "right click disable" javascript, so they "think" it protects their images. But there is a feature on every computer that has been there FOREVER that most people think actually MEANS "print screen", but it really doesn't. It actually just copies the entire screen you're currently looking @ to the clipboard to be pasted into any other document that you want. So say the person that's using the image from the Spring Mini....they may have just hit "print screen" when they were looking @ the catty online and then they manipulated it into their watermark. KWIM?
Now I'm wondering if this post is gonna get yanked because I've turned it into a "tutorial" on "how to do the naughty things". I'm not trying to "teach" how to mishandle copyrighted images, I'm just reinforcing the idea that you really DO need to use a watermark on your images because just disabling that right-click feature isn't really protecting them like you think it is!
I used the "print screen" feature when my parents were on a cruise through the Panama Canal. There is a camera there that captures every 8 seconds or something all day long, and so when they were going through the Canal I was taking "screen shots" (that's a term you'll see all the time, and now you'll know how to make your own!) of them waving to me from the deck of the ship and then I had them all printed out in order for my Mom's scrapbook so they could see themselves looking @ me, looking @ them going through the Canal! Cool, 'eh?
This seems to be turning into a "WatermarkGate" scenario. There is so much clip art out there that looks like so many other images. Even if these images look identical, it is quite possible they are from another source than SU, and most likely are IMO.
Any letter in a font, dingbat, wingding, etc. can be resized and manipulated into many alternate variations. Innocent until proven guilty in my book, and the evidence isn't really compelling. Line drawings of flowers especially are everywhere.
I just got some new Paper Salon stamps today (in a very cool tin) that look so much like some of my SU whimsical flowers. I say "coincidents happen!"
Not to be snarky, but there are so many things in this world that are really serious that need our energy. I just cannot imagine having time to police people over such things. I doubt SU has the inclination to make an issue of something that only serves to make their images more popular.
The watermark they are talking about (I think ;) ) is a very large image from the SU Spring mini. It's definitely NOT a dingbat
We are thinking of the same one then. ;)
Not a dingbat... definitely a copy of an SU image. Most likely scanned and then tweaked with a photo editing program. Though it's not quite exact... it's been ever so slightly altered (dimensions are slightly skewed, some details removed). So again,... I wonder if because the person did that, that they think it's now OK? :confused:
Not to be snarky, but there are so many things in this world that are really serious that need our energy. I just cannot imagine having time to police people over such things. I doubt SU has the inclination to make an issue of something that only serves to make their images more popular.
Actually, SU does have the time and resources to police watermarks. Have you seen the lawsuit about the copyright infringement on the paper napkins using their images illegally? Yes, they are pursuing it even though it does give them publicity for their stamps...it's still illegal.
Not to be snarky, but there are so many things in this world that are really serious that need our energy.
Yes, I agree that there are other important things in this world to spend our energy on but this is a stamping discussion board and I think it was an observation with a legit question about copyrighting. So that's what we get to expend our energy on here at SCS...atmping stuff. Now off to do more important things in my other life...laundry!
Not to be snarky, but there are so many things in this world that are really serious that need our energy. I just cannot imagine having time to police people over such things. I doubt SU has the inclination to make an issue of something that only serves to make their images more popular.
Actually SU is very deligent about trying to protect it's product and it's name in situations like this. They have an entire department that handles these things.
Let me say up front that I have NO experience with this software, therefore I can't make any sort of recommendation other than it looks pretty good from the limited trial version that I downloaded for free. It doesn't look like it makes a 'true' watermark to me - meaning one that is transparent. But, I think for someone who has limited computer knowledge and skills it might be worth a look. It is made specifically for watermarking, and it even has a button that lets you insert the copyright symbol.
The full version does cost $49 and from what I can tell, this isn't one of those shareware versions that you can really use for a while. I wasn't able to actually save anything I made so that it was useful because the trial version is disabled. There's just enough there to see what it WILL do. So, I guess it depends on how much it's worth it to you to protect your work.
Having said all that, check it our yourself and see what you think: Watermark Factory
__________________ Cindy McVey Proud VIRGINIA TECH ALUM
Please visit My Gallery & My Blog, Crazy For Crafting
I support my habit by being an SCS Fan Clubmember!
WOW!!! I had no idea *MY* watermark would be generating this much attention!! First off, I want to let you all know that Beth at http://freckledfundesigns.blogspot.com/ created the design and it is just AWESOME!! For those of you that are "curious" about what it looks like, check out my gallery. Beth does fabulous work at a fabulous price!! Second, I know for sure that it is not the *same* artwork as SU! and it was drawn by hand by Beth. Lastly, my watermark has already been APPROVED by SU! compliance. I contacted my SU! SAM, requesting that SU! compliance please review my watermark artwork, and they are in total agreement that the artwork is different enough and completely within their guidelines.
Thanks to those of you who were polite and gave me the benefit of the doubt. To those of you who were, let's just say, "a little less polite with your words", it's ok...you don't know me and I don't know you, just know that I forgive you...whether or not that matters to you, it matters to me.
WOW!!! I had no idea *MY* watermark would be generating this much attention!! First off, I want to let you all know that Beth at http://freckledfundesigns.blogspot.com/ created the design and it is just AWESOME!! For those of you that are "curious" about what it looks like, check out my gallery. Beth does fabulous work at a fabulous price!! Second, I know for sure that it is not the *same* artwork as SU! and it was drawn by hand by Beth. Lastly, my watermark has already been APPROVED by SU! compliance. I contacted my SU! SAM, requesting that SU! compliance please review my watermark artwork, and they are in total agreement that the artwork is different enough and completely within their guidelines.
Thanks to those of you who were polite and gave me the benefit of the doubt. To those of you who were, let's just say, "a little less polite with your words", it's ok...you don't know me and I don't know you, just know that I forgive you...whether or not that matters to you, it matters to me.
I'm the OP, and your post kind of cracks me up because your watermark is not the one I was talking about. I've never seen it or any of your work until I just clicked into your gallery. Why do you think we are discussing your watermark? :confused: Did someone PM you? And were they rude? It certainly was not my intent for anyone to be rude or for anyone to be offended.
Wouldn't it be funny if everyone on this thread except me, the OP, was talking about something I'd never seen? Sorry. More irony......
Using SU! images in watermark?
