Sorry, I was out of town and knew when I checked the blog today and saw that many comments something must be going down. I must admit I haven't read it all, but I skipped to the last page to read the ending. I kind of feel sorry for her, as she seems to play the victim card and blame others for the situations she creates or fabricates. I still have many questions...like who is the hat girl in the hotel? How is MB involved in this? Who leaked the first screen shot of the DST post?
Carry on...
1,339 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 1339 Newer› Newest»Her fatal flaw is that she had a business, distributed stolen property and re-distributed those products to other companies. It keep stacking for her and I don't see how she cannot get jail time with everything else.
May 3, 2009 6:40 PM
-------------------------------
Well someone has to report her first. Has anyone reported her to the police???
The more people that file chargebacks and disputes, the better. Then it forces the store owners to recoup their losses from Amanda. Which hopefully, they were doing anyway
I thought it was interesting that in her apology she mentioned 5 people knew, and 2 people from another company advised her to play the deception role, was that her hint that she plans to throw the blame on them, when she goes to court?
Seems like she has it planned out how she'll make her case. Tactic being she'll continue to play the blame game in court. But little does she realize one person won't stack against everyone else these companies really need to come together to make thier case against her.
Dish me her info and I'll take that step with no hesitation
I think she's bluffing. Trying to say that if anyone dares to take her to court, she'll take ALL those who knew about her deception down with her. She'll play the innocent victim and claim it was all THEIR doing.
We're still waiting for an explanation from the DC owner who claims she and LilyAnne were BFF - how can you run a reputable business telling lies like this to your customers?
Who else was in cahoots with her? I'm just disgusted in the so-called "integrity" of these owners/designers who remained mum over the whole affair until it became evident the truth came out and they were busted.
bet Paula Phillips is in it, too.
google is your friend. She is in Ft Worth. Tarrant county Texas
Start with contacting the Ft Worth police dept and they should be able to help, also
yeah, I'm really curious to know who she'll take down with her and the audacity to continue to threaten others if they resort to taking her to court the bitch is heartless & ruthless.
If Amanda is going to try to shift blame onto others, she will have to provide proof. That's something she doesn't have. But there's plenty of proof of what she has done. Especially if more of her victims will come forward
google is your friend. She is in Ft Worth. Tarrant county Texas
Start with contacting the Ft Worth police dept and they should be able to help, also
May 3, 2009 7:29 PM
Is there an address? because when I take that route, I'm also going to want to report her for suicide watch and have her kids possibly in the care of someone else for their safety.
Paul Dykan is her husband
bet Paula Phillips is in it, too.
---
I heard that she was also listed as a reference for LA on her applications to stores.
Has anyone ever contacted Kristy Krouse about any of this? Seems like she should be able to shed some light on the situation
Amanda's address and phone number are readily available online, but I don't want to post them here. If I could find them in a few minutes, almost anyone should be able to do the same.
MemoryMixer are still selling the AD and LAT products. I'm hoping that Amy, who also sells there and is fully aware of the situation, contacts them.
MemoryMixer is probably a M-F 9-5 operation
She's still on Facebook... Kristy is still her friend
did i miss something? so now this "new designer" over at digital candy, the one that just happened to appear right after AD/LAT are outed, the one that is selling in the store of AD/LAT's BFF Kate, is actually KATE herself? the one with kits JUST like AD/LAT and glitter JUST like AD/LAT?
seems to me that it's Amanda, back again with an even better cover. you have to hand it to her, this one is good. Kate is a real person, has been around, is a store owner (no more store owners to apply to or lie to) and how is anyone going to prove that this "little missy", who is kate, is actually AD and kate is just letting her sell as her? smart for kate too, make her store some money in the process!
shame on you kate for being so deceitful. i for one will NEVER buy from you, your store or anyone who sells in your store. you must think we're all way too stupid!
I thought it was interesting that in her apology she mentioned 5 people knew, and 2 people from another company advised her to play the deception role, was that her hint that she plans to throw the blame on them, when she goes to court?
Seems like she has it planned out how she'll make her case. Tactic being she'll continue to play the blame game in court. But little does she realize one person won't stack against everyone else these companies really need to come together to make thier case against her.
May 3, 2009 7:10 PM
--------------------------------
She wouldn't have a leg to stand on, even to someone not involved in this whole mess her lies are pretty transparent.
Amanda is not going to stop with the shady stuff until she is prosecuted and sued. She needs to face the consequences of her actions before she can face her serious mental issues
Well it would help if people stopped helping her, like disreputable designers and store owners.
shame on digital candy and it's owners.
DC is having their chat now about the new designer (who has been revealed as Kate).
Okay, let me take a guess at who possibly knew of what was going on.
My money is one of the 5 that knew had to be Paula Phillips she's practically BFF with Amanda and knew her on a personal level like they had many get together hmm we'll be back with more names to add
Kate and Rick from DC.
Oh, this is too good! @6:08, send that e-mail yet?
LOL...
Oh yeah, Amy has most indeed contacted them! ;0) But they are in Utah and totally 9-5 M-F. BTW, I am pretty sure I am not the only one to contact them either.
Amanda, packed your bags yet?
Cindy Freeman to add to that list
This is Rick, the other owner of DC. Just to let you know, our post is here: http://digiscrapaddicts.com/forum/showthread.php?p=19002&posted=1#post19002
yes, I picked DSA so that we would not be told we were just trying to bring traffic to either of the sites we own.
Don't buy from Digital Candy maybe they should be next?...bad business ethics these women need to stick to just working a real job because they are seriously lacking in the legal department for having a business.
This just gets stranger and stranger.
Looks like there's a lot more about Amanda Dykan that will be uncovered eventually.
And unless the stores and designers band together and take her on, she WILL keep doing this, if she isn't already.
Your house of cards is coming down, Amanda.
I read Rick's entire post and about 10% of it is believable.
I have to agree with the 10% believable thing.
What a load of crap
Whooaaa! I wonder how the REAL LilyAnne Taylor will feel knowing that someone had stolen her identity. That is just criminal. What a lousy underhanded thing for AD to do, taking advantage of the knowledge of their friendship.
Still....I bet LilyAnne and Kate could not have been such GOOD friends to see through the deception. Something still smells fishy to me. Surely she must have had SOME inkling it wasn't the same person.
I read Rick's entire post and about 10% of it is believable.
May 3, 2009 9:20 PM
------------------------------
I disagree, to me they sound like victims in all of this like everyone else. He sounds very genuine to me and I applaud him for coming forward and speaking up on behalf of Kate.
AD seriously needs help. GET HELP AMANDA, you really need to do it for you AND your family, you are going to end up in jail at the rate you are going.
I don't believe that LilyAnne is a real person at all. We never did find a single shred of evidence pointing that way.
LilyAnne did not exist until the day Amanda invented her, making it impossible for Kate to have known her before that.
[I disagree, to me they sound like victims in all of this like everyone else. He sounds very genuine to me and I applaud him for coming forward and speaking up on behalf of Kate.]
You're a fool. Did you LOOK at the items in this "new" store at DC?
I also agree about Rick's post being believable. We can ALL agree that AD is one sick bitch who is capable of just about anything in "the name of designing."
Who's to say she didn't do what Rick is saying she did. It doesn't sound that far-fetched coming from the woman who faked the death of her 6-year old child. She's a psycho and probably didn't think twice about bringing anyone else down with her, as long as she got to do "what she loves" - designing.
Hey Amanda! You're good with computers. You can research your jail/prison at www.prisontalk.com
Well, why doesn't Kate contact the "real" LAT? She obviously has her original email address. I would be so furious about identity theft and if she was really my friend I would notify her straight away. She can't be that hard to track down (IF she was real to begin with). I agree with the other poster--still smells VERY fishy to me.
I believe Rick.
that would make sense if Paula was in on it, she lives in TX, personally knows Paula and she designs for another company other than Amanda Dykan.
Huh? I'm confused...
So did the picture of LilyAnne look like Kate's "friend"? Or are we supposed to believe that Kate didn't know what her "BFF" from college ever looked like? 10% believable is probably being generous.
I'm sure she'd tell her "BFF" that her store was full.
Actually, I believe Rick's post, but then, I'm not looking for drama and deceit just for the purposes of drama and deceit. Sure I post on this blog, but that doesn't mean I'm going to doubt everything said or posted.
I guess I just don't understand why so many people were duped by Amanda. I doubted her the minute she walked through the doors of the DCR at DST. You know the old adage, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't true. I wonder how those designers feel now, the ones who wanted in on her first digi book so they could get their designs out there? I bet she stole from them too.
yeah, if I owned a store, with D list designers, and a BFF of mine came on to the scene who was pretty talented and good enough to sell at SPD and SO I would ABSOLUTELY tell her that my store is full...
yeah right...
No one ever said that LilyAnne and Kate were BFF from college. Why keep bringing that up?
And, you don't know if Kate did contact the original LilyAnn Taylor, there's no need to tell you that in this fiasco.
As for the previews in the store, Jesus H Christ, I can think of quite a few previews that look exactly the same, are they all Amanda too?
http://www.digitalcandy.us/forum/showthread.php?t=13561
What I don't understand is why the DC customers are still kept in the dark about "some stuff going on in the community". Why does Rick air all the sordid details at another site (DSA) that is not involved with the lies surrounding DC that prompted Kate to stop selling those designs? Yes I am a customer/member at DC but why I have to go somewhere else to find out what is actually going on on my site? Have they been upfront with us or are they just trying to put out fire elsewhere like here and at DSA?
WV: ingore=why ingore the very people who are your customers?
Huh? I'm confused...
So did the picture of LilyAnne look like Kate's "friend"? Or are we supposed to believe that Kate didn't know what her "BFF" from college ever looked like? 10% believable is probably being generous.
May 3, 2009 9:38 PM
===================
I don't think Kate and LA went to college together. The quoted email at DSA says they took an ONLINE course together. You've heard of those, right?
Kate mentioned LA's name to AD in passing, AD picked up on it...and the whole SHE-BANG was born.
What I don't understand is why the DC customers are still kept in the dark about "some stuff going on in the community". Why does Rick air all the sordid details at another site (DSA) that is not involved with the lies surrounding DC that prompted Kate to stop selling those designs? Yes I am a customer/member at DC but why I have to go somewhere else to find out what is actually going on on my site? Have they been upfront with us or are they just trying to put out fire elsewhere like here and at DSA?
------------
Yeah. Rick and Kate post this at DC, come here to this blog and post a link directing people to go the THEIR OWN SITE to read this stuff, and then they get accused of pulling a publicity stunt.
Seems they can't win for losing.
I just need a moment to point out that I find it hysterical that there's another Rick and Kate out there with a digital scrap book store.
I'm confused....
Is the DC Rick the same Rick Romer who is now running 3scrapateers:
http://www.3scrapateers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15386
and Rakscraps:
http://rakscraps.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16696
...or is this someone completely diffrent?
Rick does come across as being genuine, but I wonder... If he suddenly got an email from LilyAnne, but from a new email address that he wasn't used to... That would imply he has kept in touch with the real LA over the years, right?
So suddenly she is writing like a different person (AD) and breaking into the digital world, where she keeps a blog with information on where she lives, who she is married to, etc. Obviously this is all made up!
So if he was in touch off and on with the real LA, don't you think he would notice the little things not adding up? That is a lot of "public" information to fake, and if you were in contact with the real LA, wouldn't some of her info come out in previous emails, and then not match up???
Idiot! can't you read? that's NNNNNick Romer, not RRRRick. ugh.
Rick and Kate's last name is Earley
whether Rick's post is truthful or not, I find it hard to believe that TWO ADULTS {being Rick AND Kate}-with children- have yet to learn that when you play with a douchbag, more often then NOT you DONT come out smellin' like roses...
they "thought" she was guilty of © infringement, enough so they had to alter their site header... but they didn't question the validity of the tutorials and were willing to give a KNOWN douchbag money to purchase said tutorials?
Plausible?
I smell something, and I'm telling you right now its not any kind of ROSE I have ever smelled before...
slaps forhead! thanks for clearing that up. I did say i was confused, didn't I? sorry for any inference. back to my corner now.
Rick does come across as being genuine, but I wonder... If he suddenly got an email from LilyAnne, but from a new email address that he wasn't used to... That would imply he has kept in touch with the real LA over the years, right?
So suddenly she is writing like a different person (AD) and breaking into the digital world, where she keeps a blog with information on where she lives, who she is married to, etc. Obviously this is all made up!
So if he was in touch off and on with the real LA, don't you think he would notice the little things not adding up? That is a lot of "public" information to fake, and if you were in contact with the real LA, wouldn't some of her info come out in previous emails, and then not match up???
May 3, 2009 10:02 PM
---------------
You'd be surprised at how easy it is to fool people. It doesn't take a lot of effort at all. Once, a long time ago, one of my friends said she would know me anywhere online, so of course I had to test that, didn't I? I created an entire new person and she never knew it was me until I told her. Usually, the only time people pay attention to all the details is after the fact.
OK, so Dykan redoes their website based on Sweet Shoppe's concepts, she says she 'has permission', and they get called out on it. Then they realize she used used some doodles illegally and pull her stuff from the store. And they still trust this person to take over her bud club? Fool me once, fool me twice etc...
Oh and what about his statement:
If I had in fact knew about this, and wanted to “play along’ with it, I would have offered her a guest spot or something in our store to help “build” her persona.
Huh? They were willing to play along with the charade of someone who already proved she wasn't on the up and up?
they "thought" she was guilty of © infringement, enough so they had to alter their site header... but they didn't question the validity of the tutorials and were willing to give a KNOWN douchbag money to purchase said tutorials?
Plausible?
---------
Or...perhaps they aren't as jaded about people as many of the posters on this blog are. Maybe Rick and Kate thought Amanda had learned her lesson. Naive of them? Perhaps.
Does it follow then, that because they decided to give someone the benefit of the doubt, that they were "in on" the whole thing? Absolutely not.
It's unfortunate that they ended up still connected to AD at the end of this LAT disaster, but I don't think they should be condemned for it.
You all did some GOOD here by outing the REAL criminal in this case - AD (And yes - everything she's done is absolutely, 100% criminal, on that I agree totally). Why can't that be enough? Why is it that you have to continue to drag other people, who, while they may have made some unfortunate choices, do NOT deserve to have their names dragged through the mud?
Rick does come across as being genuine, but I wonder... If he suddenly got an email from LilyAnne, but from a new email address that he wasn't used to... That would imply he has kept in touch with the real LA over the years, right?
So suddenly she is writing like a different person (AD) and breaking into the digital world, where she keeps a blog with information on where she lives, who she is married to, etc. Obviously this is all made up!
So if he was in touch off and on with the real LA, don't you think he would notice the little things not adding up? That is a lot of "public" information to fake, and if you were in contact with the real LA, wouldn't some of her info come out in previous emails, and then not match up???
----
so AD picks this name up from kate's conversations, builds an identity, hopes that kate has never talked to LA on the phone, hopes that kate has never seen pictures, AND hopes that the real LA never gets in touch with kate again?
rather then just make up a new name? stinks of bull$hit to me.
There's no way you'd be online friends with someone for 7 years and not have exchanged pictures. I call BS. Again.
LOL. Yeah, he conveniently left out that part of his email until Kami reminded him what he said. Full disclosure? Right.... He was willing to play along with the deceit if he knew it was Amanda.
10:20 PM - I dont see anyone getting dragged through the mud. I do see several folks frantically shoveling the "shit" to try to cover their OWN asses.
The full legality of this incident has yet to come to light on this blog, and when the full scope of it does hit there will be more then AD going to court/jail. Quite a few more.
This community has HAD it with this type of behavior, AD was the perverbial straw. And anyone who knowingly had their hands in the goody pot will be sitting right beside her.
Agreed with you, @10:22, and great points.
Occam's razor comes to mind here. Is this story possible? Sure (I guess). Plausible? Not hardly.
Whatever. I now know where my scrap dollars are never going again.
okay, so wait I must have missed someting here.
Lil Missy the new designer at Digital Candy is in all reality Kate (owner of DC)
And she HAD visible products up earlier, but now they are gone???
Color me confused, but if its truely the owner, and using legal stuff, why would it disappear now?
10:36 PM her husband is claiming she has thrown her hands up in despair because of all the drama and has decided to not be a designer after all....
riiiiiggggghhhhhtttttt
Probably because she used CU items from AD/LAT for the kits and now everyone knows they were not legit. So she can't sell those kits anymore. What a waste.
I'm loving how Shauna and Kami are throwing Rick and Kate under the bus. Certainly not a way to behave and get my business.
I think its funny that they are using DSA as their "reputable" middle ground. Kami is as big a douch now as she was when she got the boot from Heidi the old owner of DC. LOL...
Round and round we go.....
There's no way you'd be online friends with someone for 7 years and not have exchanged pictures. I call BS. Again.
May 3, 2009 10:23 PM
-----------
Really? I've been online friends with quite a few people for well over 10 years and we have never exchanged pictures, what the hell for?
Anonymous said...
I'm loving how Shauna and Kami are throwing Rick and Kate under the bus. Certainly not a way to behave and get my business.
May 3, 2009 10:43 PM
They were fooled too, weren't they? Did they ever notify "the community" why LAT's products were pulled from their store? Did MistyCato, Bren and (who's the other one?) come forward with information about their collabs? Rick seems to be the only one "explaining" what happened--I must be missing where the other explanations are.
These people are all playing mind games.
LA looks a lot like Kristy
http://imaginarycrackers.com/?cat=5
http://amandadykan.blogspot.com/2007_05_01_archive.html
I can bet this was organized and theirs probably some sort of deal being made with Kate, Kami, Kristi, Amanda, Paula & Cindy they all need to be investigated by the damn cops....Have you not seen how many web pages she has? I wounder if she has pay per click for these sites cause I'd overload the clicks, just to see it stripped from her.
I'm loving how Shauna and Kami are throwing Rick and Kate under the bus. Certainly not a way to behave and get my business.
Throwing him under the bus? Are you joking? Come on Rick, you're lying and their calling your BS!
These people are all playing mind games.
LA looks a lot like Kristy
http://imaginarycrackers.com/?cat=5
http://amandadykan.blogspot.com/2007_05_01_archive.html
-----------
Yeah, if you give Kristy a narrower nose, different jaw etc. They are female and blonde, and have Amanda in common, LOL, that's it.
yep, theyd look just alike... if Kristy lost about 30 lbs, and had a different face.
Oh come on! Why is everyone still looking for a bad guy in all of this? Kami and Rick aren't hiding anything, they're not in a conspiracy with AD. If they're guilty of anything, it's that they have actual lives that they are trying to live. Why would they pay close attention to every detail of their acquaintance with LAT? For all they knew, they were just dealing with some random designer, they didn't know they needed to give up everything else in their lives to investigate and record every aspect of that relationship. LAT was just one more in a long line of designers and acquaintances for both of them, and they both have real life stuff going on as well. They missed the signs because they had no reason to suspect that there was anything amiss. You can't tell me that you pay close attention to every detail of every communication you have with everyone.
well according to the thread at DSA looks like kate is a pirate LOL oh this just keeps getting better
It's quite obvious they don't pay attention to every detail. Sooo... Kate was caught with her hand in the cookie jar and "accidentally" used a CU item she downloaded from the FTP to "check for quality"? Riiiiggghht.....
I have no problem with quality checks, especially with some of the crappy CU stuff out there. But to actually save it somewhere on your computer and forget that you didn't have permission from the designer to use it, without paying? What a misuse of owner privileges.
11:18 here. My bad, it looks like maybe Rick and Kate aren't squeaky clean after all. I just read the post at DSA about her 'accidentally' using CU products. Does this stuff go on in every store?
haahaahaa!
now KATE is busted for using CU she didn't buy! HOW MANY DESIGNERS has DC gone thru the last month or so? YIKES.. that's lots of FREE downloads right there!
Anyone actually keeping a list of the Dykan clan of skanks?
so now I ask this with 100% sincerity. Are Rick and Kate real people? Really? Im looking at his avatar on the townsquare site and it really looks like the guy from Jackass....
and no, Kami stating she talked to him on the phone does not valid him for me, she's a stealing liar too, so her word if for shit.
so now I ask this with 100% sincerity. Are Rick and Kate real people? Really? Im looking at his avatar on the townsquare site and it really looks like the guy from Jackass....
--------
No, they aren't. They are Amanda too, in fact, we are probably all Amanda, we just don't know it yet!
dont be a bitch.
Who's being a bitch? I'm just trying to lighten the mood, sheesh. You called me a name, what does that make you?
Kate just got busted for using a totally different CU item.. Another store bites the dust????
Kami is a stealing liar? What in all of this mess makes you say that exactly? Seems to me she's the one that has been lied to.
The is the biggest digi-drama ever, bring out the depends and popcorn.
Amanda you surely don't stand alone in this organized scheme.
If people hadn't notice if you read Amanda & LA Blogs and then read the screen shot of Kate and LA THEY ARE ALL THE SAME PERSON the one thing that makes her stand out is the tone of her conversation as she can keep switching persona what is hardest to change is writing/tone of conversation.
From the comments Amanda leaves Paula on her web page she ends a few of those comments in *huggles*
When you read the screen shot of Kate & LA they have similar writing habits specifically what sticks out with Kate is *huggles* and LA dollbaby they all three sound like the same person and LA makes some flawless mistakes.
At, this point the cops seriously need to intervene and I can't find her info because she has way to many web pages so please post her info so I can call the cops.
She is not only taking identities she's also using her friends & family to play along with her.
http://paulaphillips.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2007-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&updated-max=2008-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=24
http://digiscrapaddicts.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1942&page=10
11:43 PM That would be a name calling bitch. lol.
11:56 PM Kami being a fucktard has nothing to do with this shit. Other then, Im not surprised she's hip deep in the middle of it with her stir stick. Maybe some old screencaps of her will knock her off that pedistal for ya.
11:58 PM I brought popcorn AND raisonettes... bring on the show!
12:09 AM Its not uncommon for people who hang out together to start typing the same phrases...
I live in Savannah and say the Loo. Im not british, never been across the pond. But because someone I correspond with everyday says loo so do I.
haha!
wv=chespent
she SPENT all her monies, so she started stealin the CU...
every criminal leaves a trail, has a pattern and THEY ALWAYS TALK about their CRIMES!!!
fucken stupidity of people
THANK YOU AMANDA for ALL YOUR EVIDENT CLUES! hell, their so stupid they even go back to the crime scene.
Dumbest criminals caught on FACEBOOK, BLOGGER, MYSPACE and every other webpage.
Perhaps Amanda is Amanda, LA is Paula and Kate is Cindy the three that not only live in the same town but their kids frequently play with each other while the mothers ALL scrap together and maybe their all switching back and forth?
Perhaps Amanda is Amanda, LA is Paula and Kate is Cindy the three that not only live in the same town but their kids frequently play with each other while the mothers ALL scrap together and maybe their all switching back and forth?
Or maybe Kate is just a really good friend and when Amanda was pushed out of the digital scrapbooking world she stuck up for her the only way she could! Maybe she just wanted to help a friend, anyone think about that?
Or maybe Kate is just a really good friend and when Amanda was pushed out of the digital scrapbooking world
-------------
Amanda was not pushed out of the digi scrap world, she left after she was found out on numerous counts of copyright infringement. There is nothing wrong with being a friend, but enabling a friend to do the same thing again makes you an accessory.
You know what makes me laugh, is that the fact that women who posted in the original thread at DST and adamantly stated that LA and AD were two different people have removed their posts.
I guess I wouldn't want to look like an idiot either.
Whats more of a trip was Amanda was suspected of stealing back in 2007 her BFF wrote about it.
I wouldn't trust Kate and Rick to throw out my dog's shit. They are sketchy to say the least. Kate is nothing but someone who never had any confidence IRL, and now has to blow her horn all over the internet to get any respect from people. I thankfully no longer have to have any contact with her and I refuse to shop or post at any of their 800 ridiculous stores/sites. IF what they're saying is true (which I doubt), I feel for them in this crappy situation, but honestly karma's a bitch. You reap what you sow.
I think it goes back further than that, she was working for "Recollections" and 'something happened' that was 'messy'. Don't know what, but she mentioned it on her old blog.
Yeah and you can just as well believe these group of girls were FILE SHARING may be another reason why she never had a receipt or proof she bought kits.
but honestly karma's a bitch. You reap what you sow.
May 4, 2009 2:01 AM
-----------------
No. I really hate this as it's simply not true.
It's damn right hilarious that she told 5 people and how many people did they then tell? It was people within her group of circle that had to have outed her to save their ass.
they "thought" she was guilty of © infringement, enough so they had to alter their site header... but they didn't question the validity of the tutorials and were willing to give a KNOWN douchbag money to purchase said tutorials?
^^^^
This. It's what makes it way too obvious that "Kate" and "Rick" are not on the up and up
hmm, Kate's reply to Shilo is awfully defensive and snarky.
Her explanation for the flower is awfully shaky, too.
And why, for pete's sake, have your "husband" go to a forum and try to explain your side of the story? Wouldn't it be better to just explain yourself so as to avoid even MORE "misunderstandings"?
seems like there's a lot more to this story that's still going to come to light.
Three possibilites here, but only two are very probable:
1)Kate and Rick are just victims who were duped by Amanda over and over and OVER again.
2) Amanda is "Kate" and "Rick"
3) Kate and Rick were in on Amanda's scam in some way.
Further more why is Rick speaking on Kates behalf for emails being sent to Shilo? and he even apologizes for her...such BS they keep trying to feed everyone.
my guess is either #2 or #3
Maybe we should ask RICK for LA full name and questions about Lilyane? see how well he claims to know her?
Further more why is Rick speaking on Kates behalf for emails being sent to Shilo? and he even apologizes for her...such BS they keep trying to feed everyone.
--------------------------------
This is what he said in his email to me which I guess would answer why he was replying and not Kate:
"This is Kate’s husband and was at her computer when this came in."
lol @ at her computer. My husband does not answer emails that I get when he's at my computer. Particularly ones that are asking me to question my behavior.
More likely he'd yell into the next room "Hey, what the hell have you gotten yourself into this time?".
Request: Can we pleeeeeease stop using "BFF" and just say friend or best friend or I'll even take "BF?"
This isn't grade school and as much as reading all this is very entertaining, I cringe every time I see that and I feel like I'm in the bratty girl group at recess.
Carry on.
Request: Can we pleeeeeease stop using "BFF" and just say friend or best friend or I'll even take "BF?"
This isn't grade school and as much as reading all this is very entertaining, I cringe every time I see that and I feel like I'm in the bratty girl group at recess.
Carry on.
May 4, 2009 7:13 AM
***********************************Okay I just have to say that this made me LOL, seriously LOL. All the stuff in this post and the prior one and this is what you find annoying?! Thanks for the chuckle!
It amazes me how stupid some people are. You all are having the best of time making comments that are so rediculous you should go on Comedy Central. Have you ever known a real Amanda in your lifetime? Well I have and mentally ill doesn't mean not smart. They can manipulate their situation any way they want. Eventually they will be caught in their own web of deceit but unfortunately as in this case they bring down a whole lot of innocent people who were in fact dupped.
Look how many stores she got herself into. Look how many people she met up with at CHA that thought she was just great, honest and above board. She is the only one to blame in this situation and to start blaming everyone else is totally rediculous. It obviously took all this time for stores to compare notes and realize that oops something is not right here. Some store owners are smart enough not to jump the gun because if they are wrong and they make accusations that aren't true they can be sued. They all needed to get the truth.
I would tell Rick to pay back anyone who has joined the Bud Club and get rid of those tutorials. Did anyone ever wonder how in a very short amount of time she became and expert on Illustrator?? or even Photoshop for that matter to be able to write tutorials in the first place. I would bet if people looked into them now they would see that they were all stolen material from Al Ward, Amanda Rockwell and others.
When Amanda started out designing she was really crappy and was copying then. She got fired from those first stores it's just too bad when the first instances started store owners didn't share the information. Of course it's very hard for store owners to share information as there is no forum any longer for them to do that.
When she opened her own store she had no idea in hell how to run a store. Many of us knew back then there was something fishy in Oz but you don't start making accusations when you don't quite know why the fish is starting to stink.
I can't blame anyone else in this fiaso other then Amanda. She won't get any help, she won't even admit to herself she has a problem. She is probably reading everything being said about her and figuring out a way to be smarter next time around. It's very hard dealing with mentally ill people who are sociopaths as they have no conscience but it's also very sad because being mentally ill can hurt everyone around. The ones I really feel for are her family.
Seems like Sauna & Kami might know Kate is Amanda.
Amanda probably bought a part of the company DC and now these two (S & K)are probably trying to throw Kate/Amanda under the bus to gain ownership from Kate/Amanda or their now piecing together that Kate is Amanda. She already knows her AD company wont sell so buys part of DC posing as Kate (her Rick does all the talking for Kate as Kami, seems to never have phone talks w Kate but w Rick) what if her husband is in on it? as Rick does all the phone conversations for Kate & Amanda sells as Lily and they probably didn't know (K&S) that Lily to be Amanda. Her Lily persona she openly told others but kept her Kate & Rick persona a secret only they thought no one would suspect a thing. Who else if it be a guy would you have play Rick no other better person who would know enough than ones own husband.
Seems like Sauna & Kami might know Kate is Amanda.
Amanda probably bought a part of the company DC and now these two (S & K)are probably trying to throw Kate/Amanda under the bus to gain ownership from Kate/Amanda or their now piecing together that Kate is Amanda. She already knows her AD company wont sell so buys part of DC posing as Kate (her Rick does all the talking for Kate as Kami, seems to never have phone talks w Kate but w Rick) what if her husband is in on it? as Rick does all the phone conversations for Kate & Amanda sells as Lily and they probably didn't know (K&S) that Lily to be Amanda. Her Lily persona she openly told others but kept her Kate & Rick persona a secret only they thought no one would suspect a thing. Who else if it be a guy would you have play Rick no other better person who would know enough than ones own husband.
__________________________________
LOL god I think I'm gonna need a nap and 5 hours to figure out everything you just said. That was confusing but who knows, it could be true
I just have to say that this made me LOL, seriously LOL. All the stuff in this post and the prior one and this is what you find annoying?! Thanks for the chuckle!
______________
Well, no, it's certainly not the only thing that annoys me. I can't really expect the entire topic of choice to change now, can I? Your sarcasm is noted. BFF all you want.
Well, no, it's certainly not the only thing that annoys me. I can't really expect the entire topic of choice to change now, can I? Your sarcasm is noted. BFF all you want.
May 4, 2009 8:15 AM
***********************************Oh please, relax. It wasn't meant as sarcasm or even snarky. This whole thing has given me one hell of a headache, thinking about how evil and unbelievably devious some people can be (and yet I keep coming back over and over again, go figure!) It was actually nice to have something here that made me chuckle and didn't make my head spin. No offense meant honestly.
Alot of stock sites you can buy a license to use their images, so be careful when you go on your witch hunt.
Why would the designer that photographed the etsy stuff think that was OK. In any language, that is not ok. If you didn't make it, or purchase the rights to use it, it's not ok. I thought this was commen sense, no?
IDK how that's hard 2 understand you see it all the time a lot Mexican stores that are most likely under a family/friends name but someone else running it....they give their family/friends info while someone else runs it.
I can see the point of designing under a different name, I've thought about it a lot! I want to know how a new designer got into those stores and those collabs?
LOL- the title of the blog post; "Happy May Day"....
MAY DAY! MAY DAY! WE'RE GOING DOWN!
IDK how that's hard 2 understand you see it all the time a lot Mexican stores that are most likely under a family/friends name but someone else running it....they give their family/friends info while someone else runs it
----
Wow, that's got to be the most idiotically racist thing I have heard in a while.
i'd never been to or heard of a smack blog until last night, but i felt the need to chime in, as i was kate's collab partner on 'sweetly sinful'. i can only speak for my part, as i'm not kate- but i have nothing to hide in regards to my use of CU products such as the icecream cone, that has been brought up in another forum. i purchased templates from thaty borges, which are stated as CU. it's unfortunate that i've somehow been brought into this- but i just wanted to state that i have no involvement in this, other than selling at DC (thanks about the d list designers comment btw) and collaborating with kate on my most recent kit, which has now been pulled from the store for some reason. either way- i've said it before at dsa- if anyone has questions about this or comments, feel free to email me. i'm a new designer, so it really hurts to have my name/product even brought up in this. (email laura at simply-scraps dot net)
Laura! get out while you can! there are plenty of stores to go to!
okay did any of you understand a damn word that caroline b said?
http://digiscrapaddicts.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1942&page=11
I've read the damn thing 4 times and still it makes no sense to me.
I think it makes sense, though the nuance is lost in translation. She means Dykan is mad (literally), her avatar means nothing (and is irrelevant), a lot of these issues would be avoided if there was less CU and fewer 'designers' who buy CU, make crap and then practically give it away, don't let this make everyone suspicious of everyone or take the focus away from the creative aspect of our hobby, and don't blame the CT members for sticking up for LAT, they were only defending their designer in good faith and can't be blamed for loyalty.
Then see says sorry for going on and on, but you know what the French are like.
8:04 AM- So, your theory their really is a Kate/Rick who really are friends with Amanda/Paul and they ask Kate/Rick to have the ownership be put under their name while Amanda/Paul are the ones to really run it?
And that's why K&S are suspicious of Kate & Amanda?
Well, there's one person who knows the truth about the whole situation. Amanda/LilyAnn, did Kate/Rick know that you were LilyAnn or not? I know you've posted previously that Kate wasn't involved, but given the recent revelations by Kate/Rick there seem to be additional questions remaining to be answered here.
Either-
a) Kate is an innocent victim of your deceit and you are so incredibly stupid (and amazingly lucky) that you stole the identity of one of Kate's online pseudo-friends on the gamble that Kate had never seen a picture of her, didn't talk to her often enough to notice it wasn't really her, and would never again talk to her, when you could have instead just went with ANY name and not had the same issues.
b) Kate knew all along what you were up to and now you're actually <*gasp*> protecting someone while they are running the bus over you repeatedly.
Sad part is if you picked either option a or b, I probably still wouldn't believe you, so why bother?
11:18 here. My bad, it looks like maybe Rick and Kate aren't squeaky clean after all. I just read the post at DSA about her 'accidentally' using CU products. Does this stuff go on in every store?
May 3, 2009 11:25 PM
_____________________
More than you'd ever believe! Tons of file sharing between "designers" in many of the well known sites.
wv: suallost
as in: so u all lost out again
Well I have to say that if I were a designer at Digital Candy (which, thankfully I am not), the mere fact that Kate helped herself to, played with and ultimately used an item she got from the store FTP would be enough to prompt my immediate resignation. QC is one thing, helping yourself to whatever you fancy (and then using it) so is not.
Already one person who was about to join Digital Candy has decided to pull out over this, I hope the designers who are already there will do the same, over Kate's blunder if nothing else (and God knows there are enough reasons to choose from in light of recent drama). Vote with your feet.
Anonymous said...
I think it makes sense, though the nuance is lost in translation. She means Dykan is mad (literally), her avatar means nothing (and is irrelevant), a lot of these issues would be avoided if there was less CU and fewer 'designers' who buy CU, make crap and then practically give it away, don't let this make everyone suspicious of everyone or take the focus away from the creative aspect of our hobby, and don't blame the CT members for sticking up for LAT, they were only defending their designer in good faith and can't be blamed for loyalty.
Then see says sorry for going on and on, but you know what the French are like.
May 4, 2009 9:54 AM
----------------
Hey, don't put us all in the same boat. I'm French and I'm nothing like her. Quit making racist assumptions.
Tell her, not me, she was the one who said it.
Hey, don't put us all in the same boat. I'm French and I'm nothing like her. Quit making racist assumptions.
May 4, 2009 11:01 AM
***********************************She didn't make that assumption, Caroline herself did, as you can see from the quote below. Geez, relax.
As I am french, I hope my (English) words do not exceed my (French) thoughts.
It's long, but you know how are the Frenchies...
Kate/Ricks only intention is to have their name/ownership under DC that and their personal info which is their only involvement with DC (their names). If Amanda/Paul are the ones really running it then Yes, Kate knows LAT/Amanda. Amanda plays Kate/Paul plays Rick they throw Amanda/LAT under the bus because she's dead news but in the process S & Kami are suspicious of Amanda who's playing Kate probably because their are things that they both have in common (maybe similar writings through e-mails) but what throws them off (K & S) is Paul! because he probably is the one doing all the talking for Amandas as Kate.
I wounder how much phone conversation K&S had with Kate/A she seems so hidden while Rick/P seems to do all the talking like I wounder if their communication is always like that? as that's all I have seen and read P/R doing.
read it all...and I'm not a designer or anything...just a person with a paypal account that won't be charging with any of the people who posted now at all, 'cept Ruby whose uprightness from the get go has just given me nothing but more respect for her...
apologies only come when you have been caught! crap on that!
I trust about no one in the design/store area right now. I am curling into a ball and excuseing my self from the mad mad world of digifolks.
over and over, "this goes on all the time
" I keep reading. I realize that some of what is posted is not true, but enough of it is.
I won't be missed, because I'm not one of the group the insiders, I'm just a woman who likes scrapping, remember the customer?
Hey, don't put us all in the same boat. I'm French and I'm nothing like her. Quit making racist assumptions.
May 4, 2009 11:01 AM
Am I wrong, or aren't the French generally the same race as us Americans? I was unaware that French was a race unto itself now. Not to mention that she made that comment about herself, the other poster was just translating, as someone asked her to do.
So Kate is a digi store owner, does quality control on CU products, but doesn't know how to recolor a flower?
*****************
Marking my spot and pages! :) I have to go live real life for a couple days!
http://digiscrapaddicts.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1942&page=12
http://www.digitownsquare.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3&page=5
*********************
So Kate is a digi store owner, does quality control on CU products, but doesn't know how to recolor a flower?
*****************************
Isn't that sad and telling?
Apparently she could make glitter styles for Photoshop though. Had to copy someone else's packaging for them of course, her technical skills obviously don't run to laying out a preview.
It's such BS.
*****************
*****************
marking my spot too. damn, I have to admit this is fascinating and sucks you right in to see how it all will end! how much you want to bet that a lot of designers wont have as much new stuff this week, and CTs won't make as many layouts; they're all too busy reading and following links! (and maybe replying here and there) ahahaha!
OMG - WF = gonag
would that be as in "go nag amanda to come clean" or as in "she has SOME gonag(d)s!" lmao
These word verification jokes have gone too far.
The word verifications have been my favorite part of all of this!
wv: behipan... errr... forget it. I got nothing for that.
These word verification jokes have gone too far.
May 4, 2009 2:11 PM
***********************************geesh, please relax
On a totally unrelated note...what do you all think of the "So You Think You Can Design" contest this year? Contestants were announced on the weekend: http://digiscrapaddicts.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1990
On a totally unrelated note...what do you all think of the "So You Think You Can Design" contest this year? Contestants were announced on the weekend: http://digiscrapaddicts.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1990
May 4, 2009 3:15 PMIt's always the same designers participating.
It's always the same designers participating.
May 4, 2009 3:31 PM
-----------
This is only the 2nd year, right? I wasn't around last year so I wouldn't know who participated then.
Seems like there are quite a few "popular" designers in amongst quite a few unknowns. Isn't the winner determined by popular vote? Hardly seems like a fair contest to me.
any popularity contest is going to be 'unfair'. it's popularity.
Any contest with a popular vote is pointless. Might as well call it a "person with the most internet friends" contest.
It's not any worse then some of the completely hideous layouts up for nomination for the Scrappies at DST.
Which I think you shouldn't be able to use a stock photo and get nominated. They're beautiful layouts, but get your own photo, geez.
And seriously, SkrapAngel and Restored Elegance are killin' my eyes.
Not only is it unfair, but the most popular is simply re-packaging something she has already done, and mentions that fact. Wow, way to stretch yourself!
Could designers please start marking their products with "CU-free" or the like? Kind of like "Latex free".
;-)
Could designers please start marking their products with "CU-free" or the like? Kind of like "Latex free".
;-)
May 4, 2009 4:19 PM
----------------
I will be doing this in some way very soon. I just spent the better part of my weekend scanning and extracting my own elements and textures. I don't use much CU in the first place, but with all this crap recently, I'd rather be safe than sorry and will start using my OWN things instead.
ditto 4:22. I really hate extracting ribbons and ricrac so I will probably still use those, but only from one trusted source. Or better yet, I will try to start loving extracting ribbons and ricrac.
the hole situation is such crap and honestly I think I want to throw in the the digital designer towel - for real!
ima dc designer too - thanks for that d list comment. can i ask what makes some one a d list designer? just being at dc like did someone actually look in my store, buy my kit and decide that. or did they just assume that since i sell at dc. inguiring minds wanna know, for real. who else hires d list designers and like where do i go to get a bump up to c or b.
Seems like there are quite a few "popular" designers in amongst quite a few unknowns. Isn't the winner determined by popular vote? Hardly seems like a fair contest to me.
May 4, 2009 3:34 PM
So what? At least the freebies, for the most part, will be worth downloading.Not only is it unfair, but the most popular is simply re-packaging something she has already done, and mentions that fact. Wow, way to stretch yourself!
May 4, 2009 4:16 PM
I saw one of the most popular say that it coordinates with another one of her kits, which I think is great, since I happen to particularly like that kit.
So what? At least the freebies, for the most part, will be worth downloading.
--------
True enough. Good for us as consumers, but still - seems a rather pointless "contest" if you ask me. I'm pretty sure the popular designers already KNOW they're the popular ones. Seems like they're just running this whole sham because someone(s) need an ego boost.
Whatever. I'll take the freebies and run.
Whatever. I'll take the freebies and run.
May 4, 2009 5:44 PM
Exactly my point! The other designer contests are great for newbies and up and coming designers, but more often then not not something I'd ever use. But for this one I know there are designers there that can scrap and I'll take what I can get.
I feel bad for the newer designers whose work is better than the "popular" designers. I am also sick of hearing how intimitaded everyone is everyone. Please!
There are some new Designers at Sunshine Studios and they are not known to me anyways and I can say they have some wonderful kits. Some of these new girls might be the new Era of the DS community. These girls do not stand a chance however in the contests because they are just that new and the oldies do not like the new girls coming in and whipping their asses at what they think they are so good at.
so who are some of the new designers. i have to honestly say that i'm one of the many tired of seeing the same old same old all the time. something new, fresh and different would be nice.
so there needs to be a contest where only newbies and those trying to get a shot can enter. maybe someone who has been in an established store for say less then 3 months? i'm a big fan of a couple of the designers in the sytycs contest, but once again there's nothing new, nothing different.
Alot of stock sites you can buy a license to use their images, so be careful when you go on your witch hunt.
------------------
Considering that most stock sites charge a fortune for commercial use of their images, I doubt that most designers would pay the price to do that.
Seems like there are quite a few "popular" designers in amongst quite a few unknowns. Isn't the winner determined by popular vote? Hardly seems like a fair contest to me.
May 4, 2009 3:34 PM
So what? At least the freebies, for the most part, will be worth downloading.
-----------
Oh please, just because they are popular doesn't mean they are good. I downloaded a bunch of stuff over the weekend from the popular designers that I have never bought from, I will never buy from 80% of them. The quality is just not there.
On a totally unrelated note...what do you all think of the "So You Think You Can Design" contest this year?
----------
I think it's completely hilarious that it's called So You Think You Can Design and then designers who have been designing for well over 12 months enter and participate. Obviously they can fucking design or they wouldn't be where they are.
Considering that most stock sites charge a fortune for commercial use of their images, I doubt that most designers would pay the price to do that.
______________________
I have a deal with my web host that I use that partners with fotolia. Their stock images are fairly reasonably priced and I get a small discount with them through my host. They're still a little pricy but I buy a few here and there and it doesn't break my paypal account. I can buy one or two images at a time for as low as about $2-$8 each for higher resolution images. I don't get too many of the $8 ones, though. lol
ditto 4:22. I really hate extracting ribbons and ricrac so I will probably still use those, but only from one trusted source. Or better yet, I will try to start loving extracting ribbons and ricrac.
May 4, 2009 4:29 PM
------------------------------
Or you could shock horror learn to make them digitally instead of scanning them. I have seen some gorgeous made/not scanned ribbons that look fabulous!!
Or you could shock horror learn to make them digitally instead of scanning them. I have seen some gorgeous made/not scanned ribbons that look fabulous!!
__________________________________________________
That would be wonderful except for everyone out there who have to have the "real" thing. I think if the customers hadn't protested over digital looking elements, ribbons and the like there wouldn't be the problems there are out there now. But, oh gosh, designers if they want to stay in business tend to listen to their customers. They want real-we provide real.
That would be wonderful except for everyone out there who have to have the "real" thing. I think if the customers hadn't protested over digital looking elements, ribbons and the like there wouldn't be the problems there are out there now. But, oh gosh, designers if they want to stay in business tend to listen to their customers. They want real-we provide real.
May 4, 2009 7:07 PM
---------------------------------
I make all my own ribbons and I still do pretty well. If you learn your craft well you can still make digi elements look real. I personally hate scanned ribbons, they look more fake than a well created digital ribbon because of the bad lighting on them and often poor sharpness.
If more people learned to design properly instead of relying on CU stuff and scanned items there would not be near the amount of copyright issues we are experiencing in digiland now.
I for one feel much more comfortable relying on my own skills than relying on someone elses honesty and copyright knowledge.
Having to retract kits due to stolen CU stuff... what a nightmare! Thank goodness I will never have to worry about that because I do my own research and create my own products.
I have a deal with my web host that I use that partners with fotolia. Their stock images are fairly reasonably priced and I get a small discount with them through my host. They're still a little pricy but I buy a few here and there and it doesn't break my paypal account. I can buy one or two images at a time for as low as about $2-$8 each for higher resolution images. I don't get too many of the $8 ones, though. lol
May 4, 2009 6:44 PM
-----
You don't get a redistribution licence for that kind of money though, not even from Fotalia. Extract and use those images 'standalone' in kits and you're breaching your licence. AKA you're a pirate like all the rest.
Now lets not let those SO girls distract us from the topic at hand with this talk about their contest. ;)
I have a deal with my web host that I use that partners with fotolia. Their stock images are fairly reasonably priced and I get a small discount with them through my host. They're still a little pricy but I buy a few here and there and it doesn't break my paypal account. I can buy one or two images at a time for as low as about $2-$8 each for higher resolution images. I don't get too many of the $8 ones, though. lol
May 4, 2009 6:44 PM
-----
You don't get a redistribution licence for that kind of money though, not even from Fotalia. Extract and use those images 'standalone' in kits and you're breaching your licence. AKA you're a pirate like all the rest.
May 4, 2009 7:30 PM
-------------------
Exactly! That's why I said it was pricey for commercial use. I have to laugh at the idea of anyone thinking $8 per image is pricey for commercial use, ha! Maybe in digi scrap, but not for commercial use from stock sites.
I think this is the problem. Most people don't realize that the images they are getting from stock sites at a cheap price are for personal use only. They don't bother to read the licences. They really aren't that complicated. I've read the licences, both commercial and standard, at six or seven of the known stock sites and in all of them, it clearly states whether or not you can redistribute the image for commercial purposes. Some of them, I'll grant you, do allow you to use the images in a LIMITED way, for making cards, leaflets etc, but you can't use them to sell as is or use in a digital kit.
There is a reason I learnt Illustrator, CU licences are just too damn expensive.
Now lets not let those SO girls distract us from the topic at hand with this talk about their contest. ;)
May 4, 2009 7:51 PM
--------------------
Yes, let them distract us by throwing DC, Kate and Rick under the bus instead.
There are some stock photo sites that allow you to use their photos for kits:
http://morguefile.com/license/morguefile/
Each photographer has his/her own terms of use and many will allow CU without credit.
I know I have seen many kits from well known designers as well as CU items where objects were extracted from this site. There are probably more that will allow it.
It is $75 for most stock sites to release an image. If you make good money on your kits it is really not a big issue for a good image.
Anonymous said...
There are some stock photo sites that allow you to use their photos for kits:
http://morguefile.com/license/morguefile/
Each photographer has his/her own terms of use and many will allow CU without credit.
I know I have seen many kits from well known designers as well as CU items where objects were extracted from this site. There are probably more that will allow it.
May 4, 2009 7:54 PM
I thought I recognized some stuff from there! Seen lots of Christmas CU stuff using these images. I see they have free images too. Looks like the designers just extracted them for their kits/CU products. At least that saves me some trouble because I suck at extracting LOL. But now I know where they get them. Thanks for the link. I forgot all about them until you mentioned it.
WV=noisemob (this mob sure makes a lot of noise!)
If more people learned to design properly instead of relying on CU stuff and scanned items there would not be near the amount of copyright issues we are experiencing in digiland now.
I for one feel much more comfortable relying on my own skills than relying on someone elses honesty and copyright knowledge.
Having to retract kits due to stolen CU stuff... what a nightmare! Thank goodness I will never have to worry about that because I do my own research and create my own products.
---------------------------------
I agree! and it's gonna come down to the ones really having talent and experience and most likely they'll be the young ones with the degree to match their talent. They'll be the ones with graphic design as a school degree. I wish their were more designers who actually went to school to be educated enough to know the LAW. Do, others actually think they wont ever be caught? Did they not know these designers/photographers have software that can scan their images/content on-line, which then sends those photographers/writers a "red flag" that their images/content are being used and they can find you by IP address then they without warning slap a lawsuit on you, you cry innocent but they don't even realize more & more especially photographers (they're ruthless) are hunting you down because a lawsuit puts even more money in their pockets and that they don't care whether you know the law or not. This route and with economy being bad is how they're going to be making their living, your being hunted. STUPIDITY when you knowingly do WRONG.
I think the well-established designers are in the contest to win the free year of advertising at DSA, plus the publicity that being in the contest has inherently.
You don't get a redistribution licence for that kind of money though, not even from Fotalia. Extract and use those images 'standalone' in kits and you're breaching your licence. AKA you're a pirate like all the rest.
____________________________
Fotolia allows modified derivative work with their images.
Which is what I do. You never asked, only assumed, so please, keep your fingers away from your keyboard if you're going to throw insults without knowing all the facts.
I know! It's common sense if you don't ask for permission you don't have permission to use.
And to think that they teach this to you in school starting at Kindergarten. LMAO! and people try to throw the IDK crap! man these women need to really set an example for the sake of their damn kids.
You don't get a redistribution licence for that kind of money though, not even from Fotalia. Extract and use those images 'standalone' in kits and you're breaching your licence. AKA you're a pirate like all the rest.
____________________________
Fotolia allows modified derivative work with their images.
Which is what I do. You never asked, only assumed, so please, keep your fingers away from your keyboard if you're going to throw insults without knowing all the facts.
---------------------------------
Exactly! (every one who takes stock photos are pirates if they're re-altering altering w/o photographers permission)
Which is why when they say even when you purchase stock images if your going to re-alter or extract in the fine print you need to go directly to the photographer for permission to alter if it's going to be re-distributed.
Which was AD problem she probably did buy stock images but she didn't go directly to the photographer for permission to re-alter the image and to then have it re-distributed the photographer did not allow her to do re-alter or distribute.
I'd be careful of morguefile.com, not all the people who have stuff up there have their stuff up there, KWIM?
As to needing a degree to design, that's BS. Some of the best designers I know taught themselves. A degree means nothing more than you went to school and graduated, it doesn't actually make you good. Sure, some of those who have a degree are good, but they were good to start with.
For $75 an image, I can do it myself, it's not that hard and I have the satisfaction of knowing it's all mine and that I can sell it for $75 to people who can't be bothered or who simply can't.
wth is re-altering altering?
Go to photographer forums this is what they chat about ALL the time (well, depending on which forums you go to) all YOU need to do is go directly to the source. The stock sites or photographer sites are the best way to go because they have the photographers contact info for you to contact them if you want to re-alter.
I know that CU PHOTOS ARE INDEED EXPENSIVE just to use 1 photo, I know everyone using these stock photos to re-alter in this digiscrap land are stealing but you have to start somewhere when it comes to educating others because the bigger digital scrap booking evolves the more people will take notice to this community and the last thing one would want is to be hit with are lawsuits LEFT & RIGHT the customers might end up being just as equal as these businesses selling stolen property because they DON'T CARE weather you know the LAW or not.
I'd be careful of morguefile.com, not all the people who have stuff up there have their stuff up there, KWIM?
As to needing a degree to design, that's BS. Some of the best designers I know taught themselves. A degree means nothing more than you went to school and graduated, it doesn't actually make you good. Sure, some of those who have a degree are good, but they were good to start with.
For $75 an image, I can do it myself, it's not that hard and I have the satisfaction of knowing it's all mine and that I can sell it for $75 to people who can't be bothered or who simply can't.
May 4, 2009 9:02 PM
-----------------------------
ITA!!
I do not have a graphic design degree but have been digiscrap designing for more than 4 years now and am for the most part self taught. Plus there is a big difference between graphic design and digital scrapbook design. One uses more illustrator and the other more photoshop although both do get used for each style of designing.
I also don't get the whole stock photo thing, if I need a photograph, I take it myself, but then I am pretty handy with a camera I guess. Many aren't.
It is much easier and cheaper to take the photos yourself and there is no risk of being caught out for copyright/trademark infringement unless you photograph a piece of art can of coke or something.
It is even quicker to go out and take your own photo than it is to search for the right photo on those stock art sites!!!
Wow, this has been the most INTERESTING week in digi EVER! lol..
from what I gather:
-Douchbags-
Michelle Pearson - douch
Claudia - douch
Amanda/Lilyann - double douch
Mel Gibson - drunken douch
Kate/Rick/digitalcandy/digitown - douches in douchland
Kami- bus throwing douch
Sweetmade- crappy quality douch
Ms Tiina - douch..ch..ch....
Anonymous Douch - for posting the fake suicide message. Sick shits!
-Possible Douchbags-
Faith
Bren (hope not Bren. I personally *heart* you!)
Misty Cato
-Non-Douchbags-
Ruby
-Need a Hug-
the LAT CT = sorry you ladies wasted your time and talent on such a douch.
-shops to avoid-
scrap orchard
digital candy
the perky pickle or what ever
-in Need an attourney-
ummmm... heheheh...
and finally...
digi contests all suck.
did I miss anyone???
I don't quite understand the point of buying stock photos if you can't do anything with them. I would assume they are priced for larger corporations for useage in advertising or magazines or whatnot. I think every CU designer out there needs to up their prices. Seriously. It will weed out the poor designers who can't sell unless they drop their prices to next to nothing and will keep quality and originality in the market.
wth is re-altering altering?
--------------------------------
taking their images cropping it or changing/using the photo to be your logo, distributing their images as something not in original format.
Love you 9:18 <3
9.18, you forgot
-Opinionated PITA douchbag-
Opeysmom
Nesi
If you are taking of Ruby Rynne she is a triple douch, that bitch has her nose up everyone's ass. She needs to worry about her own designs and not everyone else's shit.
I don't quite understand the point of buying stock photos if you can't do anything with them. I would assume they are priced for larger corporations for useage in advertising or magazines or whatnot. I think every CU designer out there needs to up their prices. Seriously. It will weed out the poor designers who can't sell unless they drop their prices to next to nothing and will keep quality and originality in the market.
--------------------------------------
Of course that's what a designer would have to do just to see their money back but in the long run you'd profit it back and then you do the option of throwing it as sale or not.
There is a point for CU photos every business has to use CU photos.
9:36 PM I actually put Ruby as a Non-Douch because she is one of the very FEW at DST that are willing to say exactly what they f'in mean, damned what the "in crowd" think.
MUCH RESPECT for that.
damn the man!
or I guess in this case....
damn the douches *douchs?*
Here's an example of how you can't always condemn the designers for using stock photos. There's a butterfly on shutterstock.com that I own the resources to make myself. The exact same butterfly. So I could put that butterfly in a kit and I could see my name on here as being a stock photo butterfly pirate. But it would be MY butterfly image that I would own all the copyrights to. It's almost about the same as rendering a poser object and then putting the image on a stock photo site. (the butterfly is not a poser object, though) See where it can get really messy? You can't always assume piracy just because you see it on a stock image site.
There is a point for CU photos every business has to use CU photos.
May 4, 2009 9:37 PM
---------------
Every business has to use CU photos? Really? I don't think so. Or did I just misunderstand what you said?
If you are taking of Ruby Rynne she is a triple douch, that bitch has her nose up everyone's ass. She needs to worry about her own designs and not everyone else's shit.
________________________________________________
Yep, she sure is a triple douch who most likely will keep throwing threads of more corrupt designers and store owners just to come off as self righteous/noble she more of a drama douched, bitch.
Yes, but at least with a degree, they've been able to get through with plenty of constructive criticism, and the initial weed-out.
Yeah and the bitch is always saying that she would like to keep The digi world drama free. Well then bitch get off the drama bus!
Considering that most stock sites charge a fortune for commercial use of their images, I doubt that most designers would pay the price to do that.
-------------------------
Probably true but some are fortunate to run a good business and do well, enough to purchase them commercially. I have purchased several stock items from stock sites over the years with a full license, meaning I can use them in my designs and sell those designs, including my paper jobs. Of course I can not sell them back out commercially. Yes, they are very pricy and can run well over $100 an image..but they come in handy and can be used in different ways depending on how I use them. I have several designers friends (and know of others) who can afford them because they make good money (for example Katie Pertient, Michelle Coleman, Bren Boone, Corina Neilson etc).
On the other hand some designers, who aren't too bright, purchase them for personal use at around $8-$10 and then use them commercially thinking they will never get caught and when they do you hear "Oh, I had nooo idea". It's a big No-No and they know it! In ADYKAN's case she either did that or just copied them directly from the sites and did her tracing thing.
Yes, but at least with a degree, they've been able to get through with plenty of constructive criticism, and the initial weed-out.
May 4, 2009 10:44 PM
----------------
In theory, yes.
Post a Comment