Discussion about logo/original art sourcing

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Cooleyvol

You're right, we all could be sued for using MLB logos. The point here is about graphics made by those on the cc boards.

1) Show me where I have created logos from CC work and posted them here for the masses. Show me. You, on the other hand, have an entire photobucket full of stuff from creamer's site. That's why you got called out sometime back.

Anytime I've used them, I've asked permission first. That, I can assure you of. Can you say the same? Do you have permission for any of the thousands of things that you have on your PB? Other times, I've asked for things to be created for me over there. That's a different issue as well.

When given permission, I don't post them here (or anywhere else) for OTHERS to use as well. That's the difference. I have an entire PCL league using things in the very thread this thread's image came from. I have permission to use it all. Wanna see the PM exchange? Do you see what I've create here for human consumption? No, you don't. Why? Because that's not what I asked him for permission to do. I'll assure you that he will be credited for artwork once the images hit the net. Why? Because I told him I would.

Anything that I've used on the net was requested for that specific use and the creator knew that. I've never been requested to credit someone in that situation, but I can assure you, if I am, I would.

2) What we're really talking about in this thread (and you are talking about something totally different), is going to Creamer's, saving someone's work, and bringing it here either after its been edited for use in OOTP or asking someone here to make it usable in OOTP, then making it available to the masses. That's the real issue of this thread.

3) I'm not attempting to fight with you, but you called me out on actions that I simply do not do, when you do them on a massive platform. Point is, I've never said a word about your logos linked in your sig, so don't throw stones at me. You live in a glass house.

1 & 2) I'm not talking just about CC's forums (I know that's what started the conversation), I'm talking about anyone here posting anything without permission because if you or anyone has ever posted any professional baseball logo without permission then it is the exact same thing as posting anything from CC's forum (if anything, posting copyrighted logos without permission is probably worse than posting the non-copyrighted stuff from CC's forum).

3) On this issue, this whole community lives in a glass house. I am no different than any other logomaker who posts a 'set' of logos or fills a request with some logo they found scouring the net. What confuses me about this issue is that this whole community has been doing for years exactly what you say we should be against - though I can't find any exact posts I am pretty sure you, like many others, have posted MLB logos.

Yes, this thread has been about CC's forum (well, once we highjacked it from Lancaster ). But how is that different then using a Detroit Tigers logo without permission? If we want to make a big deal about CC's forum then we better (have to) make a big deal out of using real, professional logos also. But we don't, that's why I'm broadening the topic.

I think its great that you ask permission at CC's forum - I'm sure they do too. I just don't think it's necessary. Just like I don't think it's necessary to ask the Miami Marlins to use their logos - because we don't take credit for them. But we can't say its necessary at CC's but not necessary for the MLB. I think it's pretty hypocritical to get upset over logos from CC's forum but not logos from the MLB, etc.

[Cooleyvol]

If you don't think it necessary to ask permission to take an individual's work (at CC's or some other site) is your own business. Evidently, its usually expected. You're the one drawing all the attention back some time ago, not me. You're the one with a photobucket full of things that I've seen at creamer's.

I feel MLB stuff is different, so yes, I've posted MLB stuff, but never anything I swiped from anyone at creamer's site (or any other, to my knowledge). I don't normally make 'sets' and such for the masses for this very reason. Anything I use for myself is asked for ahead of time. Its how I conduct myself. Your mileage obviously varies.

[Cryomaniac]

Frankly if I don't want something copied or otherwise pissed around with I wont post it publicly on the internet. Of course most people don't have the same view of open content as me.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by silvam14

I've dabbled in adobe illustrator trying to recreate some older logos of poor quality using the pen tool, and it can be a huge pain and time consuming and still my work looks nowhere near as polished as theirs.

To a large degree it's just a matter of becoming familiar with the program, with what each tool does and what the other features are. I used CorelDRAW for logos, as that's what I'm used to, but the principle is the same. Either program has an enormous feature set, and learning it all will take time. There are also various tips and tricks one can use to make things quicker or in a simpler way (some internet searching will likely produce web sites with such help, or you can check the bookstore—I've bought a couple of such books over the years).

Now, while much of it is learning the program, one does still need some basic drawing or artistic ability. Me, for example, I can't draw people or animals so the kind of things found in many real-world logos are beyond my ability (I'd need to take some art courses). So I concentrated on logos which involved very basic imagery and/or creating various effects with the text/type.

Lately, I've been considering resurrecting a project I had thought about a couple of years ago. I haven't created any logos in a long time and I'm kind of getting the itch to be creative again.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Cooleyvol

If you don't think it necessary to ask permission to take an individual's work (at CC's or some other site) is your own business. Evidently, its usually expected. You're the one drawing all the attention back some time ago, not me. You're the one with a photobucket full of things that I've seen at creamer's.

I feel MLB stuff is different, so yes, I've posted MLB stuff, but never anything I swiped from anyone at creamer's site (or any other, to my knowledge). I don't normally make 'sets' and such for the masses for this very reason. Anything I use for myself is asked for ahead of time. Its how I conduct myself. Your mileage obviously varies.

Why? How are MLB logos different than logos made PistolPete or JayBob at CC's forum or than logos made by John Smith posted on Tumblr? They are all created by someone. So the creators of MLB logos should be given the exact same treatment as the creators of other logos: either we must ask permission of all or we don't need to ask permission of any. Its hypocritical to say we must ask one group while totally dismissing another group. That's my point. CC's forum is just a small piece of a large discussion.

Now, is it nice to ask? Sure. I think it's great that you care enough about the people in that community to be so kind . But if someone posts a piece of art on a public forum on the internet then it is fair game to 'copy and paste' it as long as the copier is not claiming credit for the original work, which we at these forums don't. To speak to your point, some people at CC's forum are not fans of that idea, therefore it is a good idea to ask permission - but it is not required.

No hard feelings against you, cooley . You are a valuable member to this community, but I think you're being a hypocrite in this. I am well aware that I haven't asked permission for any of the logos I collected, MLB or not (I don't differentiate), and I believe that that is okay because I don't claim credit for any of them.

[Cooleyvol]

That forum is a forum FOR designers, by designers. That's the difference, IMO, from other forums.

Those guys are honing their craft, and sometimes doing things for money on that forum.


As far as it not 'being required' to ask permission -- that's up to the creator of each work.

[Athletics17]

I have used Cris Creamers many of times for logos. I have seen the concept thread in those forums but don't know much about that community and it rules/etiquette.

My question is, Do all those guys in this thread have expressed written permission to use the names "Pacific Coast League", "Vancouver Mounties", "Seattle Rainiers" and, "Los Angeles Angels" to use in their concept designs??

[Nugget699]

The difference between MLB logos and concepts over on CC is pretty obvious. For starters, MLB teams earn millions of dollars per year, and whilst they could easily jump onto OOTP, or contact Markus with a cease and desist letter they generally don't bother because it's not worth the money. Furthermore, the logo/s are considered mainstream, so if anything, it creates free advertising.

With concepts, most designers (even the best ones over on CC) aren't financially as well off as MLB teams, so it's quite obvious they are protective of their work.

If I took your photobucket cephasjames and passed it off as my own work on another forum, and everyone was praising me for all the hard work I put into it, you'd be pretty miffed, right? It's exactly the same for concepts. Ok, you aren't selling the logos but once it's "mainstream" so to speak, it becomes very difficult to control where that image ends up. You only have to look on the CC forums to see people calling local/amateur teams out for pinching a logo without paying any fee. If I was starting up a local team I could easily sift through your collection and "use" a logo, despite the fact I haven't paid a cent for it.

You're essentially stealing food from the designer's table imo.

Now, I'll admit, I used to pinch logos until I realised what I was doing. I'm now in the process of having logos either designed for me (at a price, obviously) or I'm making my own. Now, I don't expect people to pay for logos to be designed (I'm doing it for real marketing purposes eventually). But a quick PM asking the designer if it's ok to use their logo is all that suffices. admittedly, most will say no, but it's just general courtesy.

[Athletics17]

Originally Posted by Nugget699

The difference between MLB logos and concepts over on CC is pretty obvious. For starters, MLB teams earn millions of dollars per year, and whilst they could easily jump onto OOTP, or contact Markus with a cease and desist letter they generally don't bother because it's not worth the money. Furthermore, the logo/s are considered mainstream, so if anything, it creates free advertising.

With concepts, most designers (even the best ones over on CC) aren't financially as well off as MLB teams, so it's quite obvious they are protective of their work.

If I took your photobucket cephasjames and passed it off as my own work on another forum, and everyone was praising me for all the hard work I put into it, you'd be pretty miffed, right? It's exactly the same for concepts. Ok, you aren't selling the logos but once it's "mainstream" so to speak, it becomes very difficult to control where that image ends up. You only have to look on the CC forums to see people calling local/amateur teams out for pinching a logo without paying any fee. If I was starting up a local team I could easily sift through your collection and "use" a logo, despite the fact I haven't paid a cent for it.

You're essentially stealing food from the designer's table imo.

Now, I'll admit, I used to pinch logos until I realised what I was doing. I'm now in the process of having logos either designed for me (at a price, obviously) or I'm making my own. Now, I don't expect people to pay for logos to be designed (I'm doing it for real marketing purposes eventually). But a quick PM asking the designer if it's ok to use their logo is all that suffices. admittedly, most will say no, but it's just general courtesy.

Stealing is stealing. No matter if it is from a huge corporation or from an individual designer. Doesn't matter if it is mainstream or not. Someone is forking over money from it. Throw in the fact that almost all of the MLB/MiLB artwork in this community has the trademark removed makes it a violation of the law.

So if one of those concepts is bought by a professional team and is used, then is it alright to take it without permission????

I understand what both sides are saying, but to say one thing is alright then the other is wrong is BS.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Athletics17

I have used Cris Creamers many of times for logos. I have seen the concept thread in those forums but don't know much about that community and it rules/etiquette.

My question is, Do all those guys in this thread have expressed written permission to use the names "Pacific Coast League", "Vancouver Mounties", "Seattle Rainiers" and, "Los Angeles Angels" to use in their concept designs??

Every time someone over there does a concept of an existing team they are using someone else's intellectual property - but they are claiming credit for that concept.

[Nugget699]

Portraying a logo that's trademarked in a fictional environment (be it a novel, movie or game etc.) is generally considered fine. As long as the use of the logo doesn't confuse the viewer as to who owns the trademark. Which in regards to OOTP would be considered fine (I'm sure if the MLB wanted to they could find a loophole) as the logos are generally being used with the correct team name. Although people who use current MLB logos for fictional teams could, in theory, be in hot water.

As logos from CC are not trademarked they generally fall under "All Rights Reserved" to prevent people from pinching them. It'd be exactly the same as someone using your holiday snaps on Facebook without your permission.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Nugget699

If I took your photobucket cephasjames and passed it off as my own work on another forum, and everyone was praising me for all the hard work I put into it, you'd be pretty miffed, right?

Honestly, no, I wouldn't be miffed because 1) and this is the most important thing to remember, I don't pass it off as my own work - I never have and 2) I didn't collect those logo for credit, I collected them for sharing.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Athletics17

Stealing is stealing. No matter if it is from a huge corporation or from an individual designer. Doesn't matter if it is mainstream or not. Someone is forking over money from it. Throw in the fact that almost all of the MLB/MiLB artwork in this community has the trademark removed makes it a violation of the law.

So if one of those concepts is bought by a professional team and is used, then is it alright to take it without permission????

I understand what both sides are saying, but to say one thing is alright then the other is wrong is BS.

That's a huge point to me. If we can't be intellectually honest about this point then we can't even have the conversation about should we ask permission of not.

[Athletics17]

Originally Posted by Nugget699

Portraying a logo that's trademarked in a fictional environment (be it a novel, movie or game etc.) is generally considered fine.

It is not fine if the trademark is removed, it is against the law. Which the majority of the community does, including myself.

[Nugget699]

Yes, exactly. So why remove the trademark then?

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Nugget699

Portraying a logo that's trademarked in a fictional environment (be it a novel, movie or game etc.) is generally considered fine. As long as the use of the logo doesn't confuse the viewer as to who owns the trademark. Which in regards to OOTP would be considered fine (I'm sure if the MLB wanted to they could find a loophole) as the logos are generally being used with the correct team name. Although people who use current MLB logos for fictional teams could, in theory, be in hot water.

As logos from CC are not trademarked they generally fall under "All Rights Reserved" to prevent people from pinching them. It'd be exactly the same as someone using your holiday snaps on Facebook without your permission.

If I'm not mistaken, 'All Rights Reserved' is a phrase used under Copyright Law. Unless the folks at CC's copyright their material, 'All Rights Reserved' does not apply. And for 90% of those concepts I'm not sure they could even legally copyright them since they are using someone else's intellectual property (which probably is copyrighted or trademarked).

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Nugget699

Yes, exactly. So why remove the trademark then?

Because they're ugly.

[Nugget699]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Honestly, no, I wouldn't be miffed because 1) and this is the most important thing to remember, I don't pass it off as my own work - I never have and 2) I didn't collect those logo for credit, I collected them for sharing.

But some people don't want their logos for sharing. How hard can that be to understand? But you have just made the decision on their behalf that they should share them, like it or not.

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Because they're ugly.

I would LOVE for some team/MLB to take you to court for breaching trademark laws.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Nugget699

1) But some people don't want their logos for sharing. How hard can that be to understand? But you have just made the decision on their behalf that they should share them, like it or not.

2) I would LOVE for some team/MLB to take you to court for breaching trademark laws.

1) Then they shouldn't post them on public message boards that allow copying of images. In my search for logos I ran across quite a few sites where I needed to be a member of the site before I was able to do anything that allowed me to copy the logo. I did not use those logos. Those people took the steps to assure the work they did was only available under their terms.

2) Okay. I wasn't trying to be flippant, just trying to lighten the conversation up a bit. People in this community remove the trademarks because, again, we don't claim credit for the artwork that we use.


A question for you: if copying someone else's work and using it, without claiming credit for it, is stealing, then is it stealing for members of the OOTP community to use, without claiming credit and without removing trademarks, MLB/MiLB logos?

[Nugget699]

No it's not because if you read above:

Portraying a logo that's trademarked in a fictional environment (be it a novel, movie or game etc.) is generally considered fine. As long as the use of the logo doesn't confuse the viewer as to who owns the trademark. Which in regards to OOTP would be considered fine (I'm sure if the MLB wanted to they could find a loophole) as the logos are generally being used with the correct team name. Although people who use current MLB logos for fictional teams could, in theory, be in hot water.