131–140 of 146 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I block it by default, so that wouldn't work. I would love to make web pages that I myself could read/see if they were made by someone else.
Consider a middle ground. Check out uMatrix, it allows you to block third-party js by default while allowing js from same site as well as making it simple to permanently allow selected domains for one or all others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I block it by default, so that wouldn't work. I would love to make web pages that I myself could read/see if they were made by someone else.
Fair enough. There's so much JS only functionality now though that I can't see how you can avoid it when developing a complex website. You find you can do the majority of things you want online with JS disabled?
It mildly bothers me that the stroke for phone-off is the opposite direction to all the other *-off icons.
If it was consistent with the rest of the *-off icons this is what it would look like: http://svgur.com/i/2if.svg .
Seems like a good time to mention an absolutely awesome - https://icomoon.io/app It allows cherry-picking icons from dozens of different SVG icon packs (including Feather) and packaging them into a custom (web)font. It can also be used to package your own SVG assets into a single font file and then use resulting .woff as an SVG sprite sheet.
I favor using image formats for images, and fonts for text :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this example, the copyright interest is in the digital file, not the subject matter of the image. As long as you do not use Facebook's own file, such as by wrapping a PNG downloaded from Facebook in an SVG, there is nothing to derive. But if you did do that, there would also be nothing transformative either, so your new image file would not be eligible for protection. If it seems stupid and counterintuitive to sep…
> In this example, the copyright interest is in the digital file, not the subject matter of the image. That's not my understanding of what the derivative works protection covers. What else is to prevent me from making a new Star Wars film using Lucasfilm's (now Disney's) characters?
You can make a Star Wars styled film that makes no mention of any existing Star Wars trademarks (an intellectual property minefield) and Disney couldn't touch you (legally). They could still smother you with their massive business negotiating leverage, by threatening to blackball anyone that screens your movie.
It's called pastiche.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In this example, the copyright interest is in the digital file, not the subject matter of the image. That's not my understanding of what the derivative works protection covers. What else is to prevent me from making a new Star Wars film using Lucasfilm's (now Disney's) characters?
The Star Wars proper nouns are trademarked. Characters, vehicles, planets, etc. That is all. You can make a Star Wars styled film that makes no mention of any existing Star Wars trademarks (an intellectual property minefield) and Disney couldn't touch you ( legally ). They could still smother you with their massive business negotiating leverage, by threatening to blackball anyone that screens your movie. It's called…
"A “derivative work” is a work _based upon one or more preexisting works_, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, _art reproduction_, abridgment, condensation, or _any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted_. ..."
As applied to the company logo in question, the language is pretty well on point. I'd tread with caution unless the company has made it clear they approve of the work.
They're beautiful, but I'd much rather use them as an icon font. Is there any way to do that?
Fonts are more convenient to use, but they usually don't display as sharply as SVGs. Generally icons should be only shown at the size they were design for. With icon fonts some sharpness is possible, even if difficult, but it still doesn't look as good as SVGs.
Got some more info/theory on why you believe fonts display less sharp than svgs? And screenshots maybe? :)
Given the choice, I'd still use SVG btw, but that's because icons aren't text, and SVG is a lot better fit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Star Wars proper nouns are trademarked. Characters, vehicles, planets, etc. That is all. You can make a Star Wars styled film that makes no mention of any existing Star Wars trademarks (an intellectual property minefield) and Disney couldn't touch you ( legally ). They could still smother you with their massive business negotiating leverage, by threatening to blackball anyone that screens your movie. It's called…
Since I can't seem to convince you, here's a definition of "Derivative Work" straight from 17 U.S.C. 101 ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/101 ) (emphasis mine). (FWIW, I am a licensed attorney who specialized in IP law while in law school; this is not legal advice.) "A “derivative work” is a work _based upon one or more preexisting works_, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fiction…
.-----.
| .-| Probably does not
| -+-| violate copyright.
| | |
'-----'Seems like a good time to mention an absolutely awesome - https://icomoon.io/app It allows cherry-picking icons from dozens of different SVG icon packs (including Feather) and packaging them into a custom (web)font. It can also be used to package your own SVG assets into a single font file and then use resulting .woff as an SVG sprite sheet.
Why not use separate SVG files? You could reference them as data-url from the CSS to save round-trips. Perhaps it's just me but using a font to store icons seems arcane.