Please look at this LINK before you post any more signatures

so does that mean i cant get a new pink flames pic then ohhhhhh and temptress was doing such a great job makes u wonder y ppl use the boards really

@*yunnie* wrote:

@morticia wrote:

@*yunnie* wrote:

it’s not the same in his avatar, no different then your avatar or mine, it dont become and issue til you alter an image and add your name to it.
Most artists do allow their work to be used for sig tags and only require a link back to their site, but GILD artist tend to be more assonite and want you to purchase a license to use their work, in my case im not about to pay for it just dont use it.

Who needs a G.I.L.D. License? Anyone who wishes to use the copyrighted intellectual property of another person or entity must first obtain a license, or permission, to use the property for any reason whatsoever. It belongs to it’s Creator (in this case – Artists), who has complete reign over his or her artworks. You need a license if you intend to use the image(s) in any way (including displaying the image on your website or tagging with them).

This doesn’t say anything about altering the image Yunnie, only that you can’t use any image that doesn’t belong to you without the consent of the artist.

Maybe we need further clarification ?

Oh and LOL @ Jooly – gotta agree with ya gal ! and pass the drink ! :D

no i meant artists in general, you dont need a permission to use it on an avatar, but when you alter it then yeah and like i said most only require a link back, GILD is a group of artists only certain ones that you need a license for,
im not starting sh it with anyone, i just commented on something i know about pardon me… :roll:

Calm down dear it’s only a commercial :roll:

I was merely looking at the the contents of this GILD website and quoted the above – if it is only relating to its own artists then it is not clear.

pardon me for reading something and thinking it meant something else……………

*grabs extra strength spectacles*

wouldnt have had a problem with that Tommy if someone had some balls and actualy said something to me about and if there was a problem id have removed them, by them removing the thread and saying nothing they have made it look like i have intentionaly broken the copyright laws which is not the case as i was using graphics from supposedly safe tube sites which state their images are copyright free, cant say im to happy about that. But i doubt i will recieve any explaination of this. If it was removed as a precautionary measure why didnt they say so?

If you wanna get realy picky about copyright i believe that most news items are covered, a news article from a site, which is copy and pasted to another can be an infringement of copyright, depending upon the size of the excert taken, but i doubt the serious threads would be removed because of it. :roll: