151–160 of 165 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corn fields, I suppose.
Try as you may, there's no inconsistency here. Everyone thinks plagiarism is wrong.
Are there any reasonable escrow services out there for designers? It seems that a third party with a list of conditions for both sides could hang on to a predetermined amount of money and the digital assets until both parties agree to release. There are perhaps caveats that I've not considered, but this idea comes to me again and again when I hear this kind of story (again). Edit: Guess I also have to throw in here t…
"list of conditions for both sides ... predetermined amount of money" - that is what contract is. If they had it - no need for escrow.
1. The contract will be honoured and
2. The cost of litigation is lower than the unpaid $.
Seems weird he mentioned Spike Lee (who did nothing wrong, as far as I can tell) so many times, but didn't name the agency. Seems to hurt the wrong party's reputation. Additionally, he has no apparent way to contact him. EDIT: I really don't want to point fingers with 0 proof, but Spike Lee happens to be CEO of an ad agency named Spike DDB. https://twitter.com/SpikeDDB
Presumably his contract prevents him from discussing internal issues with any outside party. (Knowledge source: Got totally screwed by a business partner via legalese and had all my work stolen, ended up doing half a year of work uncompensated, can't legally talk about it or the partner, and loss < cost of litigation. Ah well, water under bridge.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So long as the author/designer didn't have a contract in place to sell his work, then they don't own it and he retains copyright. As a result they're committing criminal copyright infringement and he should be referring this to the FBI for federal prosecution. They will have zero ability to prove that they own the work so I imagine it might go very well for the designer.
Well, no. http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So long as the author/designer didn't have a contract in place to sell his work, then they don't own it and he retains copyright. As a result they're committing criminal copyright infringement and he should be referring this to the FBI for federal prosecution. They will have zero ability to prove that they own the work so I imagine it might go very well for the designer.
Surely you're a lawyer with extensive experience in copyright law to make such a claim.
There is no contract between the designer and the design company. And from what he says, he didn't get paid to develop on an hourly rate which means that it's not work-for-hire. And he hasn't been paid, which means that there wasn't an implicit contract or a verbal one that culminated in payment.
That means that the design company won't have any proof that it originated the art (and thus would have copyright of it), nor will it have any proof that it purchased or licensed the art (and thus would have some rights to use it). The designer could likely produce many design iterations that might be quite convincing to a jury that he was in fact the person who generated the designs.
Of course there's no way to be sure that the FBI would take the designer seriously. He's just a "normal guy" and his adversary is large and probably well funded. But that doesn't mean that the "normal guy" is wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"list of conditions for both sides ... predetermined amount of money" - that is what contract is. If they had it - no need for escrow.
You're assuming that: 1. The contract will be honoured and 2. The cost of litigation is lower than the unpaid $.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And so I ask again, when did I agree to that, in an explicit or implicit way? And you yourself answered, "you didn't if you downloaded it without paying". So no, there isn't.
When did you agree to let the police protect you if they encounter you being mugged? Some things are just part of societal existence. You can't opt out of them any more than you can opt out of paying your taxes on profits you make.
That's a particularly poor example.
Supreme Court Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html
In case you can't get past the paywall (try googling the title and going from there), the summary is that a woman got a protective court order and then she called police and told them her husband had violated the court order. They did not act, and he killed her three kids.
If a court order with explicit instructions to arrest should it be violated isn't enough to move the police into action, simply encountering you isn't worth a hill of beans.
"But they said that the important thing wasn’t the money it was the exposure and potential for more work. After thinking about it long and hard I had to decline. " Because the exposure was more important than the money. Would have of course been nice if they stated this upfront but they didn't. That's water under the dam at this point. I have regularly done work for people at no charge. This has not only led to a gre…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely you're a lawyer with extensive experience in copyright law to make such a claim.
Surely copyright law isn't that difficult. Every person owns the copyright to everything that they make, even sans registration with the LoC. Okay, so the designer does retain copyright, provided that it wasn't work-for-hire. There is no contract between the designer and the design company. And from what he says, he didn't get paid to develop on an hourly rate which means that it's not work-for-hire. And he hasn't be…