GfxDiary

Oh brother. Funny that you didn't include my whole mail ... so I'll do that instead.

Let's start off with me getting some pms that you are the "owner" of the tuts i made and that you demand deletion. So I wrote you a mail:

Quote:

Greetings, Oleg.

I am replying to your pms sent to me today accusing me of ripping your tutorials. How exactly can you prove you are the author of those? Or are you maybe ripping me and now trying to get me to remove mine? I mean wtf. I for one took some of the techniques out of experimentation, books and actions. It's especially funny that you are accusing me of ripping simple techniques that:

- are seen on hundreds of sites (several webmasters told me that they found the idea from *my* tuts)
- were published in books (that were probably not written by you)
- were published as actions and layer styles in millions of variations

Two authors that really did create their tutorials and came up with some cool effects are properly credited.

And what exactly do the metal tuts have in common? That they use layer styles? I see two different effect in the end. Or was "me ripping you" referring to the point that you came up with how to make metal text? Hello?

I personally don't really care much if people take the ideas from my tutorials. Stumbled trough your site before ... saw the similar tutorials but never sent you an outraged mail. I actually sent you an email asking if you were interested in link exchanging (but never got any reply from you). Oh well...

Now if you were mentioning a rude reply from me, may I remind you of your reply:

Quote:

Hello,

ahaha, ok buddy. I am the wrong person to rip from. I am kinda busy right now with the exams and all, but when I will find some free time I will come after you. I do not think that I will take any legal actions because of the ripped tutorials, but I will make sure that when people think about you and your site, they think about a lame ripper. I emailed and asked for some credit or removal of tutorials, but you want to make it ugly. The small thing that you will learn after this is that rippers never win.

One more qustion, does your host speak english?

Oh yea, I just saved your ripped tuts to my site, so no need to try and change them. lol

In the mail you are clearly threatening me, telling me that you saved the tutorials and put them on your site without any permission from me.

I fail to see where in your mail you show me that *you* are the author of the so-called-ripped tutorials or that you ask me that you want credit (you demanded immediate removal). Please do you mind sharing this with me and the rest of the people here?

If not who the hell gives *you* the right to accuse *me* of ripping the tutorials on noxcell and not vise versa? Huh?

With regards,

Domen Lombergar
Lombergar.com

Well I'm not the one that's lazy, so:

I fail to see where the hell you prove that *you* are the author of the tutorials. Where? I fail to see it. Just because you started this thread an saying that I RIPPED YOU (and not vice versa) doesn't now automaticly make you the author. Is a simple proof too hard to come up with, huh?

Other than that you could just be somebody that ripped me and now trying to get my site a bad word. Is proving so difficult?

As I said in the email (for all those who want to know we are having an email discussion also) I am waiting for some solid proof. If there isn't any your words here are without meaning and your actions would be pretty low.

Oh one other thing. I am the one running a non-profit site and do not have like a zillion ads on it like google and mediaclick. Ppl that read this might find it interesting to know...

noxcel wrote:

Just because my site actually gets some visitors, and I run ads to support it, it gives you the right to rip my tutorials? About the proving that I wrote the tuts is not hard. See the screenshot that I made and it will prove that the tuts are the same. How old is your site? My tuts that you ripped are more than a year old, everyone knows that I wrote them because back then, when I was just starting out, I was starting a new topic everytime I wrote a new tut. I do not know if you can check the creation date in a psd file, but if you can, my date will be a lot earlier than yours. Thats all the proof that I need, i need to go now, will reply to your reply when I get back...

Well I'm not running a 1-hit site either you know. imho putting ads on personal sites is highly unprofessional. But that's just my 2 cents, oppinions differ from person to person.

Funny thing though ... i'm currently running my personal portfolio at a daily visit of a minimum 1k unique (2056 today, record at 3240 unique on march 7th) and got a number of mails that i should check out your site (amongst others) because you have similar shit, but I didn't report you, cause I don't really give a damn what you do. Post doggie porn and casino ads for all i care.

You can check the creation date of psd files, but you can very easily fake it so that's really not proof of anything. It may proove something to you (why on earth you?) but you were asked to prove your accusations.

And once again ... if you can't prove me and the people that are reading this, than what you did (accusing me of ripping) is truly low.

Interesting discussion here. GfxDiary members you are advised to take a back seat and watch the action unfold, i dont wanna see anyone jumps the gun until we see proof of FILE PROPERTIES from both parties. This should include CREATION DATE & LAST MODIFIED! :idea:

From what i know, Noxcel.com has been around for over a year and launched publicly long before Lombergar.com! Site layout/advertising aside, i dont wanna take sides on this one. So please do the honourable thing and ignore, and move on. Or demonstrate with proof who made the tutorial first. :arrow:

Well I asked noxcell if he could somehow show me that he is the first one that made these tutorials. I know there were a million websites before mine and I am pretty sure some of the effects are very to completely similar. Like the fire effect for which someone pointed me to the person that first came up with the technique. Monk is now credited as well.

I am now aware that he created his before mine but I am also aware of some pretty much nicer tutorials for eg. metal text that were created way before 2003. And for that I am waiting for in the entire thread. I just want proof that he was the first to made these tutorials and nothing else.

As for the mag is concerned ... I recieved a mail from the editor and gave him my consent to publish them, yet I haven't recieved any money for that .... not even a print of the mag, lol. Could somebody like show it to me so I can see what the mag is like?

So again - please show me that you were the first to create these tutorials and I will be more than happy to properly credit you or remove them if you so like.

I'd just like to point out two posts from graphic forums here, that a lot of people seem to agree with. They were posted by billynomates, a member of GF.

Quote:

Hi,
This is an interesting problem in terms of legality and ownership...

i am an indutrial designer so have a fair bit of experience with patents, copyrights etc...

the way it works is that once your work is in the public domain unprotected be it images or desings, whatever...you FORFIT the possibility of later claiming ownership of that article...

hence unless you put a copyright on your original tutorial images when they went on the web, lombi is entitled to duplicate them. the moral side of it apart, it is not illegal for him to do so....

also since you are using software with finite variations, it would be simple to argue that lombi simply used the same combination of settings to produce the exact same effect...

my advice to you would be to in future put a copyrigth symbol and the year on every image in your tutorial files, because as it stands i dont think you have any proof what was done when...

i can 99.9% say no court would accept the date given in the property section of a file as evidence, but a simple copyright symbol goes a long way...

im afraid intellectual property on the web is incredibly difficult to protect! EVERYONE should copyright their sites, even taking a copyrighted image and modifying it slightly as lombi would have been doing is ILLEGAL...

i hope this helps a bit

Billy

And the other reply:

Quote:

noxcel,

you must copyright every image individually for them to be protected.

as far as what boozer is saying about this getting serious, i really cant see how the law can provide an answer to a problem like this...

a colleague did a folding chopping board for the uk and us market and had it ripped off in china by some manufacturer...they even used his hand drawn images of how the product works on their packaging...i mean what a rip!! However since he didnt patent it in asia, he could do nothing... since it was manufactured in china they could even export it legally to uk and us because the patent only covers manufacturing, not distribution...

his instruction images is a perfect case of how not originally copyrighting your images leaves you without a leg to stand on!!

with no disrespect, being a junior member of these forums, but i believe that boozer is wrong to indicate that some kind of action could be taken...simply becasue noxel wont be able to claim the tutorial as his own...like i said the only thing a lawyer will ask you for is the copyright and without it you are screwed...

we can all learn lessons here, so everyone take note...

Billy

And I am still fully prepared to either credit you for the tutorials (nickname + link to site) or take them down if you show me that you were the first one to come up with tutorials that teach those three techniques (that you made metal text with blending modes, that you came up with the pretty well known techniques such as that sketch effect one and the texture one). And an apology from me of course.

Here I found the original file, was on my old PC:
1] http://newtutorials.com/date.jpg - the creation date of the file, the tutorial was created on the same date or a day after.

2] I posted a topic about it: http://tutorialforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41560
It was on 07:52 AM 04-02-2003

3] http://www.good-tutorials.com/author/noxcel.com
April 03, 2003 - Metal Text Tutorial - noxcel.com

here is what I have as a proof, and he has nothing :wink:

sorry, does not work, as I posted on other forum.

I also, know what he is trying to say. He is saying that there are 100000 of metal text tutorials out there and that I did not invent the technique, but comon, he ripped the tutorials STEP by STEP, value by value. Yes, I did not create layer styles, but I created the tutorial[S] and he ripped it.

ahahahahaha, look your site has yellow background, I will go rip it now because there are 100000 of websites will yellow background.

Lombi wrote:

What is this ... a p|ssing contest? All I asked was for you to show me that you are the original author of the tutorials and you managed to insult me in every post.

I think I have clearly exposed by simple 10-minute googling that you are not the original author of one of the three effects (sketch). I am still calmly waiting for you to show me otherwise for the other two.

And again - a file property is the last thing that could be served as "evidence", because I can have a file ready that was created inbetween the second world war, that was last modified between the spanish revolution and was opened on the 9th of september.

//edited *beep* > p|ssing

lombi, I do not see how posting links to tutorials that at the end do not look anything like mine, proves that I am not the author of my tutorials.

I proved that I am the author of metal text, deal this it and then we can move on to other tutorials.

Lombi wrote:

Quote:

Originally posted by noxcel
lombi, I do not see how posting links to tutorials that at the end do not look anything like mine, proves that I am not the author of my tutorials.

Well did you just forfeit your own arguments? You were accusing me of using the same technique, and the sketch effect that was done in Photoshop 4 (if metal text was done in april 2003 then your sketch effect is even newer). So same technique done way before yours. Think about what you are accusing me. He that is without sin may cast the first stone. And you're packing a freakin' Gatling here.

But if you are completely contended with how yours looks different in the end and that it differs from the tutorials to which I pointed you then what the hell are you accusing me of?

I proved that I am the author of metal text, deal with it and then we can move on to other tutorials.

I proved that I am the author of metal text, deal with it and then we can move on to other tutorials.

I proved that I am the author of metal text, deal with it and then we can move on to other tutorials.

maybe posting it 3 times, will make you read it MR.RIPPER

when I say they do not look like mine, I mean, they look nothing like mine, they create today different effect. LOL

Well, Noxcel proved his side of the argument. He showed the screenshot proof of when the file was created. Matrix movies and stories aside, all films will need permission from the author before filming a remake of the same film - if they use a concept thats made by other movies i know for a fact they need the permission of the original creators :idea:

I havnt seen the two tutorials in question but from the screenshot noxcel posted up, its seems they're almost identical in blending values and settings. Lombi, you tell me: what are the chances of choosing those same values for your tutorial without having seen Noxcel's tutorial? 1 in a million? 1 in a billion? The evidence is there, the values are identical apart from one! :?

If you did (which is now what it seems) use Noxcel's tutorial(s) as a base for your tutorials, then the honourable thing is to either take down the tutorial(s), change the values, or give a reference credit to noxcel's tutorial(s). Saying he did not invent that effect is fighting a loosing battle, this is not about who invented the tutorials, its about who copied who's values.

To be honest with both of you, think about why are you making tutorials? Isnt it to help people? That alone renders this entire topic pointless, but i guess its personal satisfaction from noxcel's side - he wants to find out why both tutorials have identical values :!:

hey limbi and nox, do you have sex much often?
you should, maybe you can start liking eachother..

Lombi wrote:

Well I really don't have the energy to argue anymore. For the time being I am willing to either fully credit Oleg for the metal text and the texture one or remove them from my site at once. I said for the time being because I am redoing the tutorials to cover the basic aspects of Photoshop more and to spend lots more time on explaining how each tool works troughout the process. Which will mean that some of the tutorials will be combined with others and some will just be removed (i kinda hate my voice in the earlier tuts). And some video tutorials for other applications such as corel draw, dreamweaver and flash.

Thats will be nice. Please remove metal text tutorial from your site and deviantArt account. About the texture tutorial, it was created by Fusion_racer at tutorialforums.com, you can contact him and ask if you can use his tutorial.

Quote:

I am redoing the tutorials to cover the basic aspects of Photoshop more and to spend lots more time on explaining how each tool works troughout the process.

Good luck on that, but I do not want to see any of my tutorials or tutorials from newtutorials.com in your future projects.
Thanks

Finally a peaceful resolution and a good ending from both of you 8)

A sign of true sportsmanship, now you can both head your separate directions and hope to remain on good terms with each other ;)

Hey sim if you want me and nox do a new post making fun of ya girl actions, just say somethign else here.

RedD wrote:

Hey sim if you want me and nox do a new post making fun of ya girl actions, just say somethign else here.

haha, no need for that Red, I am sure that people make fun of him in real life. I am writing article/tutorial type thing soon, where I write what to do and not do in webdesign, guess what site I will use as example of a very ugly site? --> sims, after the release of the article, A LOT of people will make fun of him, just like in his real life....fucking geeks

No RedD, you're mistaken, this is as much about webdesign, tags & standards as digital art, photo manipulations and design! Just look at the forum, it has its equal forums about Programming and Design! Its a balanced act ;)

Well, this topic served its purpose, the discussion is closed. Damn, you guys can be so childish sometimes hehehe!