New SU watermark rule?
 

Is there a new rule on posting SU cards on line and requiring some type of watermark?

I know a lot of people use the watermark so others can't claim work as their own, but I haven't heard of being an SU rule. Maybe a demo will know?

There is no SU rule. It is just a precaution that some are taking to avoid people using their designs for their own uses... There were a lot of people noticing "image theft" of their designs.

This is why I asked. Check out this blog; maybe a demo knows something?

freckledfundesigns.blogspot.com

It's not a NEW rule - that one has been in place for quite some time - I remember being told about it a long time ago :) Not everyone does it tho and I've never heard of SU! cracking down on anyone who was posting things online without the 1990-2007 added on.

I'm not a demo and I don't know the lady in the blog but I wonder if she's just trying to fool demos....kinda like the way people list things for sale on Ebay saying they are "retired" and they are not just to run the price up! I would think if SU was requiring it they would have let their demos know it before they let the person producing watermarks know....KWIM??!!!

She is an SCS member, Myprecious, and she hosts the Featured Stamper Sunday challenge. I'm sure if we just ask her what new requirements she's referring to, she would be glad to let us know. And, she did coordinate this design with SU according to her blog.

I'm a demo, and I wasn't aware of anything new. I like that it says some images are SU, which looks like it makes it OK to mix companies.

I'm quite sure that Beth is not making up any watermark rules to self-promote. She is a long-standing member of this site from almost the beginning and a SU demo for quite some time. Also Beth is trying to start up a reputable business...I'm more than sure it is NOT the case here!

I sent Beth a PM about this thread and asked her if she could help us understand the new requirement she's referring to.

So sorry Beth if you get multiple PM's.

I'm not a demo, but as far I know, this is nothing new. You do not need a "watermark" so to speak, but you do need to have in text on the photo the SU copyright information.

Which is:
�Stampin’ Up!
1990 - 2007

I believe that is why in the gallery under all the pics there is the copyright info: Some images �Stampin’ Up! 1990 - 2007

This is nothing new. These rules have been in the demonstrator manual for at least a couple of years. Here's some quotes:

And

I had no idea. And I used to be a demo. thanks

While the policy is not new... I think the confusion might have come from Beth's statement on her blog:

So some of you were inquiring as to the new Stampin' Up! requirements which I learned of last month.

It's great that she has worked to develop a watermark style that has been approved by SU compliance. Thanks, Beth.

actually I know someone who had to take their site down until all cards on their site had the appropriate watermark - per SU

I remember that too. The one I'm thinking of was contacted by SU! and given a ridiculously small amount of time to do it too, then if I recall correctly SU! gave her a larger window of time after many of us protested.


Cheers,

That's cool! :)

If I read the rule carefully, if your card is on a website, copyright acknowledgement is required, not an actual watermark on the picture itself. I hope this is correct. PLEASE correct me if I am wrong, because . . .

There is NO way I'm going to start creating watermarks for every company whose stamps I use and slap them on top of the picture of the card. That would be silly, especially when using multiple companies on one card.

But I have no problem acknowledging the materials used in a card in the description section of my blog. :)

Hi - since this post refers to me and my blog - I thought it would be appropriate for me to clarify my statement. I only learned of the exact requirements this past month (late March), when one of my watermark customers presented her watermark to Stampin' Up! compliance for approval. She told me of these requirements. Her watermark had her name and the line:
Images � Stampin� Up! 2007

Stampin' Up! told her she needed the following:
Images � Stampin� Up! � 1990-2007


Quite frankly, most of the watermarks I have created have not had the � symbol on them becuase *I* wasn't aware it was required. When creating a custom watermark for a customer, I asked the individual to provide me with the exact text they wanted for their watermark. If you go to my blog, you will see quite a variety of copyright information for the Stampin' Up! portion of the watermark. Most people didn't even want to put dates on their watermark. I would occasionally get the question of whether or not this information (dates, etc.) was required on a watermark and I didn't know the exact information until one of my wonderful customers let me know.

As far as the posting on my http://freckledfundesign.blogspot.com blog, I did post this week in order to bring this new information to the attention of my former and current/future customers. I wanted my former customers to know that it they wanted to be compliant to Stampin' Up! standards, they should get in touch with me and I would modify their watermark. I was not trying to drum up any business. On the contrary, I was offering to provide this modification service FREE to my former customers because I value their business and I want to ensure that they do not get into trouble. A non-su demo could use any watermark that they want. However, I think an SU demo should be aware that there are requirements which I was not aware of until last week. That is my blog and my forum for communicating quickly with a large audience. I would never try and fool anyone. I am actually creating more work for myself.

I hope this clarifys my blog posting.

Thank you for contacting me (Julia) - you ROCK girl! :mrgreen:

And no - it is not a new rule - Just new to me! {grin} That is why I wanted to let my customers know via my blog!

No, you're not wrong Joan - I should have been more clear - the site I was referring to had to have all images updated with a copyright (some had them some didn't).

ok, I appreciate the clarification. All is well!!!

Thanks for starting this thread- i didn't know either- i suppose i'll be changing my watermark this week!

Big ditto. Since this 'rule' is gleaned from the Stampin' Up demonstrator manual the rule would naturally apply to demonstrators, not customers. Perhaps this verbaige included on the back of the order form? I do not have one here to check but wonder...

I beleive it applies to any artwork displayed on the Web using SU images- as the site I had mentioned the gal is NOT a SU demo - and SU contacted her and told her that all the SU images on her site needed the copyright information

Wow! See I was more concerned with SU! demos getting in trouble - but they did that to a non-demo! WOW! Thanks for the info! I guess when people ask - I am going to point them to this thread!

I'm a huge respecter of copyright law. I always give credit, but did they really contact a customer over her blog???? I hope this isn't the entire story and that there were more egregious facts than this.

This probably means the SCS Gallery SU footnote under our photos should be updated to include 2007...

Could one of the mods check that out, or should a note be posted somewhere else to ask this ???? Probably a note under site suggestions/questions might be in order. I don't want to put it there if someone else has already done so, or if this is in the works.

I think putting it on your watermark is just a way of being doubly safe. When we post on SCS it is put automatically below our pics. This helps everywhere else.

SU has been heavy handed for far too long. This cinches it for me. No more! Reading what was in that blog, directly from SU, was so completely "big brother" by a company that has been heading this way bit by bit over the years. Last straw. I am done!

That's what I was referring to -- the line below our pics. Now it says 1990- 2006. To comply completely with SU's guidelines, it needs to show the current year, and now should be updated to read 2007. I agree with many others that their policy is too restrictive.

Thank goodness SCS does this for us!!!

The rule actually says that you have to use the trademark symbol when you use the trademarked name of a product doesn't it?

wouldn't that only apply if you are listing specific named items such as Stampin' Scrub or Stampin' Mist, or Hodgepodge Hardware?? At least that's how I understand Trademark vs. Copyright.

Is this for when we post a pic in the gallery?? if it is i guess i won't be putting any in that uses any su products..<sigh>.
They are sooo strict.
loves ya

Yes Joan - she was contacted about the samples on her website - and SU said that any images on the Web had to include the SU copyright

SCS takes care of this for us... they rock!

I guess I don't understand where the heckity all this uproar is coming from? Is it somethin' in the water? There IS no "new" rule from SU. SU has always required that copyright info be provided when their images are used and posted on the internet or published in a magazine. That's not new and it's certainly not an exclusive requirement to SU. It's actually fairly common to have copyright "rules" set forth by many companies.

The only new thing I can think of is the watermarking that's been going on, and that has absolutely nothing to do with SU. That's come about because of image theft....people actually stealing an image from here or another website and posting it as their own. Putting the watermark ON the picture deters that theft. As long as the watermark is going to be in the picture, it's logical to put the copyright info in there as well. But it's not and NEVER HAS BEEN a requirement that the copyright info be watermarked.

THis reminds me of the old "gossip" game, where children whisper something down the line, one to another, and see how different the story becomes on the way. There's no big deal. There's nothing new.

Exactly, Betsy.

I have this little piece of typed paper that I've been putting on the scanner with my cards when I scan them, and have been doing it that way for years. If you look in my gallery at my oldest cards, you can see that. Obviously it would be difficult to change those dates, but SCS has me covered on that. :)

Copyright law is one of those things that doesn't care if you are a demo or not.

LOL My earliest one is hand-written and says copyright 1990-2004!!

And just for the record, I have no problem with their protecting their copyright. I know what can happen if they don't protect it aggressively.

Some of you probably don't remember when you could go into a restaurant and just say "I'd like a coke" and everyone KNEW you meant "cola-flavored beverage" and you'd get whatever brand they had.

All of a sudden, around 1970 or so, waiters/waitresses started saying, for example, "We have Pepsi, is that okay?" The first time I was asked that, I was shocked, and just said "whatever."

NOW I know that Coca-Cola was told that if they didn't protect their name - that if they let the word "coke" become a generic word for cola soda, they would lose their copyright. So they started really cracking down.

You may know that Palm, Inc. came out with the first common PDA. For about a year, everyone called them "PalmPilots" and then "Palms." DH came home one day and said "We need to stop calling them Palms, and call them PDAs." (He worked for Palm at the time.)

The other one I remember as a kid is Kleenex. Any tissue was called a Kleenex.

Not any more!!!!!

I remember the coke & kleenex.

Now it's soda and tissue.