Jump to content

mint/rumshot -- separated at birth?


Recommended Posts

The $30 is for a more involved dynamic site but, from what I read the basic layout is under a share & share alike license. I'm sure Andrew will give the credit where credit is due when he has the time.

The actual three column style with thickened borders definitely pre-dates mint. ;)

Link to post

now, reading the post(s) written by Inman, it seems like his design does not allow for derivative works because copyrighted. So Andrew will have to change.

I just don't get where the licence is made explicit on Inman website :| I mean, I see the little © at the bottom, but is there a link to the CC licence anywhere ?

Link to post

Okay. Here's the links gleamed from his blog

http://www.shauninman.com/post/heap/2006/0...elation_to_mint

Here's the licence link:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.5/es/

There's a few problems with this, he needs to make his licence for every Country not just Spain. If one is to be specific actually this licence can be interpreted as it is okay to use the exact design but, don't change it in any manner & give credit.

Even then Copyright is only beneficial if you can afford to enforce it financially.

Link to post

Guys, guys, guys, you're reading this all wrong. I never released the design of www.haveamint.com as a theme--under any license. The post referring to the Spanish CC is referring to a previous pirate of the haveamint.com design (www.pfdt.org, now removed) who released his "version" of design under a CC license even though my copyrighted original design didn't allow any kind of reproduction. The haveamint.com design is not available for others to use. Not credited. Not for $30. Not even for $30k. (The $30 is the cost of my stats app, Mint.)

Link to post

I fear so. Are we getting too used to see CC at the bottom of every webpage? :P

Andrew knew what he was doing, but didn't realize it was "strictly copyrighted". One thing I never remember is that just a simple "©" symbol in a page is enough to copyright the content - unlike GPL or CC than need more "explicit" text or link.

However, just to be sure, does the copyright of a design include the code, the appearance, or both ?

Link to post

Hey guys. I've been absent for a while, but thought I would comment. There was no ripping of the design from haveamint. Inman's website definately inspired the layout. The three column thingie was very well done. Column widths are different, colors, borders are similar but still different and there are several graphical aspects which are close, but yet not the same. The design (along with the horizontal three column variance) is from scratch, I still have the original graphics, and the layout html is also from sractch.

Inspired work is everywhere, all around you. Take a trip to borders or barnes and noble and hit their graphic design section. They have no less than two dozen books on logo and graphic design for print. The one common lesson they share is 'variance on a theme'.

For anyone who has communicated with me regarding Kapsules in the three years (well, 2 since its been dead for a while) that it's been around, you'de know that I never did allow copyrighted stuff to be uploaded for Kapsules, namely Konfabulator rips. I have a pretty good track record with that stuff. If you would like to argue that by saying 'hey now, a peeking out angled corner of a window is a neat idea, and i dig the three columns' is ripping his work, well, it's the 'net :) You're allowed.

Edit

Just thought I would mention... The shellsape.org server is down at the moment. Should be back up within a day or two, so you'll be able to see the original graphical concepts which were posted in another thread that someone linked to in this one. If you've been trying to contact me via an @shellscape.org address, my mailserver has been down for some time. Your best bet is a private message here for the time being.

Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...