Stealing signature design

[hosseinimr93]

I don't know whether using signature design of another user or a campaign is against the rules or not. But I think it's kind of plagiarism and it should be against the rules.

This user is using design of Cryptotalk.

Archived.

[1714803057]

1714803057

[aioc]

I don't know whether using signature design of another user or a campaign is against the rules or not. But I think it's kind of plagiarism and it should be against the rules.

This user is using design of Cryptotalk.

Archived.

It's unethical, it's tantamount to plagiarism and anyone doing this should be ban, if we let this happens then every developer will just copy other project's works, we must not support from that are doing this and people who does this should be tagged.

[bitmover]

It's unethical, it's tantamount to plagiarism and anyone doing this should be ban, if we let this happens then every developer will just copy other project's works, we must not support from that are doing this and people who does this should be tagged.

What is more absurd is that cryptotalk signature barely have a design. It is mostly composed by big letters without any art, just with fancy colors.

He could at least change the colors, nobody would accuse him,.

[NeuroticFish]

What is more absurd is that cryptotalk signature barely have a design. It is mostly composed by big letters without any art, just with fancy colors.

He could at least change the colors, nobody would accuse him,.

Actually it's not absurd. I think that the user intention is that others click his link by mistake and get some traffic to his website.
Quite childish behavior, however...

[kzv]

Theft of design in order to profit from the labor of others is plagiarism imho

[logfiles]

That outright plagiarism, the lazy culprit only changed the letters and URL to his website. I Mean even me who has no much technical knowledge regarding BBCodes or how signature are designed could do better.
What away to start of by advertising your website unprofessionally  

I don't know if he can get a ban for doing such thou.

[rosezionjohn]

It's quite funny actually. I don't know how the admin or mods will see this. I guess they will just let it pass until the owner of the signature complains.
I doubt that Cryptotalk (Yobit) will do that though. This user has been using a similar signature design to Yobit for a long time and nothing is being done about it.

[TheNewAnon135246]

Theft of design in order to profit from the labor of others is plagiarism imho

I personally don't see the issue if someone alters a signature design for personal use. It becomes a different story if a campaign steals another campaign's design.

[LTU_btc]

I personally don't see the issue if someone alters a signature design for personal use. It becomes a different story if a campaign steals another campaign's design.

I agree. Maybe it's not very ethical behaviour, but I don't think that user should be punished for it somehow. Unless Yobit/Cryptotalk would come here and tell that they don't allow to use their design. But as I understand, this design is used only for personal purpose, so it's not big issue. In all years on Bitcointalk, I saw quite many users copied designs of well known signatures (Chipmixer, Yobit and others) for personal purpose and nobody said anything about it

[yahoo62278]

It would still be nice if users asked permission before using the design. Most designers would let them use it with no problem at all. They just want to be asked permission first.

I don't know the designer of cryptotalk sig so I wouldn't know who to ask. I assume they have their own designer on the team.

[LeGaulois]

I noticed someone some days ago using the signature code from Chipmixer. I wasn't sure what to think expect unethical but perhaps he asked permission or perhaps they noticed it too but didn't see any harm with it. The thing is actually this member isn't earning anything from it, nor he's advertising a site he owns or is paid for. He's getting fun with it

Otherwiser we should be worry since the link promoted is the FBI website lol

[rhomelmabini]

That's laziness on his part to the 10th level. By the way, I notified the user to explain his side or if he has the intention to put this in ease or return what he stole.

steal - take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.

[ChuckBuck]

It would still be nice if users asked permission before using the design. Most designers would let them use it with no problem at all. They just want to be asked permission first.

I don't know the designer of cryptotalk sig so I wouldn't know who to ask. I assume they have their own designer on the team.

I think this is really a signature theft act to promote his website. All of us don't know who is the designer of Cryptotalk's signature, including you. Therefore, I believe that he did not know the designer and did not have any requests for permission, and he was just stealing it. My thought  

[hugeblack]

Agree with those who think it would be a crime if he resold the same design with a change of some words but it appears that the use is personal.
Second, there is no professionalism in design so anyone can design a signature similar to Yobit/Cryptotalk for less than $ 5.
The only grievance is from Yobit/Cryptotalk, who can ask for compensation in view of the profits @chesatochi makes because he uses a similar signature for his signature: "Profit from the possibility of confusion between the two signatures."

[Harlot]

I've seen this kind of "sig design stealing" before I don't remember who the member was but it was Bitmixer's signature design and from by the looks of it they were using it to mock Bitmixer for something. And I do agree with you that stealing the design of signature campaigns isn't right as they are freely benefiting from the sig designer's work without their permission and can be counted as a copyright violation rather than plagiarism since we are talking about a sig design here not a post from a member, if they have tweaked it in a major way where we wouldn't know their origin then I think I can consider it but with your example above the user only tweaked the letters for their website and it is really not right to do.

[eddie13]

I think it's fine as long as he is only using it personally and isn't trying to sell it..

I would also think that forging a cryptotalk signature would have the opposite effect of trying to get people to click on it by mistake, lol..
Some people actually click on cryptotalk links? Like on purpose?

It's hard for me to even imagine paying enough attention to a cryptotalk signature to notice it was spelled incorrectly.. It's like camouflage if anything..

[rhomelmabini]

Well, I've already notified the user but he's been offline ever since that day. The issue here shouldn't be focus on him solely I guess it is a general issue and if another case may happen that should be criticized IMO.

"Not your design, not to be worn on your signature profile."

[hosseinimr93]

He could at least change the colors, nobody would accuse him,.

Changing the color makes no difference. That's even worse than just changing the domain and do nothing else.

It's quite funny actually. I don't know how the admin or mods will see this. I guess they will just let it pass until the owner of the signature complains.

They shouldn't wait for that. Like what they do with plagiarism. They never wait for the original writer to complain.  

I personally don't see the issue if someone alters a signature design for personal use. It becomes a different story if a campaign steals another campaign's design.

I don't agree with you. Campaigns usually pay for signature designs and they should be the only people use what they have paid for.

I think it's fine as long as he is only using it personally and isn't trying to sell it..  

How to know if the design hasn't been bought from someone else?
(Talking generally, not about the case)
The user is using the design freely, while others pay for it or create it themselves.