Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why he should (if that is what you are implying), they didn't bother contacting him (apparently).
Because that's how the law works?
I don't see any lawyers involved.
What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
71–80 of 88 posts
Re: What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
#72For what it's worth, here's all the data (JSON-formatted) about the domain, registrant, delegation, etc.:
api.nicalert.com.ar/domains/dsignio.com.ar
(shameless plug for my Nic.ar API)
Re: What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
#73A little backstory: They stole my site (socketstudios.com) which showed up on my analytics as they for got to remove it. They also left the contolling javascript file on my server. I modified it to load images of dogs that have no idea what they are doing.
Using Firefox 12 with NoScript installed, your site is entirely unviewable. Even in its most permissive mode (which works for the vast majority of sites), NoScript does block cross-site scripts that it considers dangerous. On your site, I get this in my Error Console: "[NoScript] Blocking cross-site Javascript served from http://flesler-plugins.googlecode.com/files/jquery.scrollTo-... with wrong type info application…
Sorry, forgive my ignorance (I'm a designer not really a developer) but are you saying I should host all my JS myself?
As for the fall back to a working site should JS be disabled, or the scripts fail to load you're entirely right of course. There is a lot I could still do to the site, but it serves no real purpose and was largely just an experiment so isn't very high on my to-do list at the moment.
Re: What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using Firefox 12 with NoScript installed, your site is entirely unviewable. Even in its most permissive mode (which works for the vast majority of sites), NoScript does block cross-site scripts that it considers dangerous. On your site, I get this in my Error Console: "[NoScript] Blocking cross-site Javascript served from http://flesler-plugins.googlecode.com/files/jquery.scrollTo-... with wrong type info application…
Sorry, forgive my ignorance (I'm a designer not really a developer) but are you saying I should host all my JS myself? As for the fall back to a working site should JS be disabled, or the scripts fail to load you're entirely right of course. There is a lot I could still do to the site, but it serves no real purpose and was largely just an experiment so isn't very high on my to-do list at the moment.
Using a CDN is usually appropriate, but not hotlinking someone's site.
Re: What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
#75Back in 2006 some guy ripped off my entire front-end for his ticket selling site in Europe and made the same mistake. I found out when going though my analytics. I blogged about it and actually made it to the front page of Digg (a big deal at the time): "How NOT To Steal A Design": http://digg.com/news/story/How_NOT_To_Steal_A_Design Ah memories :)
I was on digg a lot back then and I remember that story!
Re: What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, forgive my ignorance (I'm a designer not really a developer) but are you saying I should host all my JS myself? As for the fall back to a working site should JS be disabled, or the scripts fail to load you're entirely right of course. There is a lot I could still do to the site, but it serves no real purpose and was largely just an experiment so isn't very high on my to-do list at the moment.
Using a CDN is usually appropriate, but not hotlinking someone's site.
That's not true. Linking to jQuery stuff on Google's CDN is widely accepted.
If you're using Noscript, don't act surprised when modern javascript websites break for you.
Re: What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
#77[deleted]
Re: What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
#78A little backstory: They stole my site (socketstudios.com) which showed up on my analytics as they for got to remove it. They also left the contolling javascript file on my server. I modified it to load images of dogs that have no idea what they are doing.
Using Firefox 12 with NoScript installed, your site is entirely unviewable. Even in its most permissive mode (which works for the vast majority of sites), NoScript does block cross-site scripts that it considers dangerous. On your site, I get this in my Error Console: "[NoScript] Blocking cross-site Javascript served from http://flesler-plugins.googlecode.com/files/jquery.scrollTo-... with wrong type info application…
I tried to read your comment with my eyes closed, but was unable to understand it. Please assist.
Re: What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
#79A little backstory: They stole my site (socketstudios.com) which showed up on my analytics as they for got to remove it. They also left the contolling javascript file on my server. I modified it to load images of dogs that have no idea what they are doing.
Using Firefox 12 with NoScript installed, your site is entirely unviewable. Even in its most permissive mode (which works for the vast majority of sites), NoScript does block cross-site scripts that it considers dangerous. On your site, I get this in my Error Console: "[NoScript] Blocking cross-site Javascript served from http://flesler-plugins.googlecode.com/files/jquery.scrollTo-... with wrong type info application…
Using noscript in 2012 is like watching TV with your eyes closed. You reap what you sow.
Re: What happens when you rip off a site but forget to host the JS yourself
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tangent: these kind of sites (the site that was stolen from), I'll call them "concept" sites, make me want to throatpunch a baby. If you are seeking to demonstrate your jQuery/HTML5/CSS3 skillz then do it in a way that has some applicable context. Don't break so far from established usage conventions that users have to invest their the majority of their focus figuring out the site at the expense of examining the cont…
Thanks for that. It was a 'concept' site largely for my own amusement (and to teach myself a little bit of js). I do have a private portfolio site that shows more of my work and has no javascript in it at all.
The biggest problems for me were
-seeing the whole picture - how many items do you have in your portfolio, how can I just find one that looks cool -nagivating quickly - i want to go to the bottom of the site but there is 5 seconds of just waiting for the thing to load correctly -understanding usage - i go right 3 times then go down, i didn't realize that when i went down it automatically sent me to the left
I am all for cool design styles (nullrecursion.com), but standard conventions are standard because they are good. Get a solid understanding of why they are used before trying to reinvent the wheel