Everybody who agrees that more colours for Iran are desperately needed - more needed than colours for Saxe-Meiningen or Secondary Kansas, Mecklenburg-Schwerin or Strelitz - will get them sooon...
COVFEFE - COlours Veritably For Everything For Everyone
- Thread starter Pragmatic Progressive
- Start date
- Status
I told him not to just copy and paste the format of TOASTER.
In retrospect, it was a bit confusing, and I probably should have made it clearer; but I meant that he shouldn't just copy and paste TOASTER and then use it [with additions of course] as his own scheme.
In retrospect, it was a bit confusing, and I probably should have made it clearer; but I meant that he shouldn't just copy and paste TOASTER and then use it [with additions of course] as his own scheme.
Last edited:
I think CalBear asks you if there's a case of plagiarism there in your opinion or not, rather than to translate the mock-IRC post you did. Is there?
yeah, but the deal was overall confusing so i dont really blame him
No, I meant, are you still thinking, right now, that it might be a case of plagiarism?
Or are you fine with the current state of things?
Okay : I personally find a bit weird to consider a colour scheme as a personal work, giving that most of them on board can directly be traced from the original TCS, and that they tend to be collaborative works.
But that's not for me to decide, so here we go.
I would say: @XO Mapping , I really apologise. i misunderstood the deal in a way that I could just do this and be authorised to do so. Really, really sorry for it.
As even @XO Mapping does not blame me, I probably shouldn't get banned.
What do you think about it, @Dom ?
As even @XO Mapping does not blame me, I probably shouldn't get banned.
What do you think about it, @Dom ?
Partly, yes. But I took the last version of TOAST2R - with all the additions by the community already in. Not the very original, first scheme that was purely made by @XO Mapping ...
As you are also a moderator who could decide on this case I thought... or at least give "official judgement" or an "official opinion".
Skallagrim
Banned
Now it's back to the whole 'plagiarism' debacle? This is getting preposterous. Lots of people contributed to TOASTER, and in its origin, it was in turn based on colours used and conventions introduced by earlier schemes. There is no way anyone can claim that all of TOASTER is his or her work, and ban others from expanding on it.
As long as credit is given, continuing a work that was collaborative in the first place cannot be plagiarism.
As long as credit is given, continuing a work that was collaborative in the first place cannot be plagiarism.
This covfefe is based on toaster, which is in turn based on x2, which in turn is based on older works.
X2 is specifically stated to follow https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ for licencing purposes and derivative works. Seeing how those terms work, its basically impossible for the owners of toaster to say this is a violation, since their use of X2 as source material means they implicitly agreed to those licencing terms. In particular, insisting that the format be changed in order to use the work is in effect an additional restriction on usage, which is not allowed by the licence.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.
My understanding is that this belief is not generally correct when legal niceties get involved. The creative commons licence as used by X2 (and by implication, its derivatives) was written to enable this kind of activity (among other things). But that doesn't mean this always applies.
X2 is specifically stated to follow https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ for licencing purposes and derivative works. Seeing how those terms work, its basically impossible for the owners of toaster to say this is a violation, since their use of X2 as source material means they implicitly agreed to those licencing terms. In particular, insisting that the format be changed in order to use the work is in effect an additional restriction on usage, which is not allowed by the licence.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.
As long as credit is given, continuing a work that was collaborative in the first place cannot be plagiarism.
My understanding is that this belief is not generally correct when legal niceties get involved. The creative commons licence as used by X2 (and by implication, its derivatives) was written to enable this kind of activity (among other things). But that doesn't mean this always applies.
Last edited:
Skallagrim
Banned
Very true, although it depends on the jurisdiction. I have no idea where the various contributors live, nor where the Ah.com servers are located. As far as I know the laws where I live, one might try to prove which specific additions he/she made and demand that those spcific elements be removed from later edits. But that would be very tricky indeed.
However that is all rendered moot by...
...the creative commons licence, which would indeed apply to all derivative works by definition. So that pretty much settles the whole issue.
- Status