Removed

[Llorean]

There's nothing wrong with creating a similar interface. But reusing an image (even if modified, perhaps to scale it down) without explicit permission (in the form of an appropriate license) is a violation of copyright. Yes, any violating image/theme should be reported to the site.

[ZincAlloy]

speaking of copyright violations: there's several themes on the wps gallery that are violating copyrights as well. should I delete them?

[Llorean]

Yes, and place a note there so that (hopefully) the author sees why and doesn't just re-add it without resolving the problem first.

[hhannah]

speaking of copyright violations: there's several themes on the wps gallery that are violating copyrights as well. should I delete them?

I'm all for cleaning up copyright violations, but how to guarantee it will be done with the adequate criteria, rather than a personal/subjective one? I'm sorry but I can't help wondering what will happen to Zakk Roberts' "Brushed Metal (2006)" http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/WpsIpod5g#Brushed_Metal and ZincAlloy's theme with the same name (2008) http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/WpsIriverH300#Brushed_Metal

[Llorean]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your point. Are you saying we should err in favour of violating copyright? Better to be too lax, than too strict?

[AlexP]

If the author of a removed theme feels it shouldn't have been, they can of course explain to us why it does not infringe copyright, and if it then turns out to have been removed in error it can be re-added.

[ZincAlloy]

what's wrong with the brushed metal themes? they have the same (descriptive) names for obvious reasons...

I wasn't aware how many themes were violating copyrights. so many were using ipod or Zen Vision M graphics or manufacturer's logos...

[hhannah]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your point. Are you saying we should err in favour of violating copyright? Better to be too lax, than too strict?

It seems I didn't make myself clear, although I started with "I'm all for cleaning up copyright violations". I'm just saying that if this is done by just one person's criteria, objectivity could be lost. In this case, just as an example, ZincAlloy (the person who is going to delete violating themes) made recently a theme called Brushed Metal, in the wiki he states

An original theme by me

, while since 2006 theres is a Brushed Metal theme by Zakk Roberts (no licensing). Similarities are evident. But my point is not "the Brushed Metal themes"; it is objectivity in applying criteria.

[Llorean]

I'd say "if it reuses pieces of other peoples' work without explicit permission in the form of a license" is pretty objective, though...

[ZincAlloy]

Similarities are evident.

are you visually impaired?

[yapper]

I see no re-use by Zinc Alloy in his theme, compared with the earlier Brushed Metal theme. It's obvious his 'brushed metal' background is totally different.

[ZincAlloy]

exactly. the only thing that is not different is the name - there's no creative work involved with the name (lack of creativity led me to naming it brushed metal  ) as it is a descriptive name. creative work is necessary to create copyright.

[hhannah]

Similarities are evident.

are you visually impaired?

This is not personal, there's no need to use an offensive tone.

I'd say "if it reuses pieces of other peoples' work without explicit permission in the form of a license" is pretty objective, though...

I couldn't agree more.

speaking of copyright violations: there's several themes on the wps gallery that are violating copyrights as well. should I delete them?

Yes, and place a note there so that (hopefully) the author sees why and doesn't just re-add it without resolving the problem first.

If one person can do this on his own, others might as well, but if that's how it's intended, I hope they delete themes for the right reasons.

[Llorean]

Please, don't assume tone on messages. It's entirely possible he wanted to honestly know. Do you think he would've used the term "visually impaired" if he simply wanted to say "are you BLIND?!" in a negative tone? This is a very real problem I've noticed with text on the screen: people decide for themselves what tone the other person must've meant. Rather than assuming you know what he meant, why not ask first?

[hhannah]

Please, don't assume tone on messages. It's entirely possible he wanted to honestly know. Do you think he would've used the term "visually impaired" if he simply wanted to say "are you BLIND?!" in a negative tone? This is a very real problem I've noticed with text on the screen: people decide for themselves what tone the other person must've meant. Rather than assuming you know what he meant, why not ask first?

Well Llorean, you can put it under the "It's entirely possible he wanted to honestly know" label, but honestly, I don't think you're that naive. So, one thing is having someone starting to use an offensive tone on you, and another thing is bearing with the fact that a Rockbox staff representative, supports him (is your attitude related to an argument we had some time ago? It's alright I don't need an answer) Others might take it - I've seen it before. Well I don't take it. It's just against what I believe in, and of course, against what I like, no matter how much I care about Rockbox as a project. It's just a matter of personal principles, something no one can argue about. No big deal, no worries, I'm out of here anyway… just say the last word and make it look better... (or not)