You frequent a smack blog to gossip and bitch, and I'm a sad fuck. What a bloody hypocrite. I'll be happy when people like you take your talentless arses away from the scrapping community. You cheapen it.
July 23, 2010 1:39 AM --------
Stop looking in the mirror, maybe you;l surprise yourself.
Do they really care? This site has been reported by me and no doubt by someone else 3 months ago and still alive http://www.rleeroush.net/DisneyDigitalKits.htm Then, there is shitload of stuuf like that on ebay. Saxon's kits were not even close to this. Some digital designers borrow color schemes and common shapes which is fine. What you see above is obvious theft.
She must read here or was told by someone she was reported because I report Disney stuff on ebay all the time and yet it's still there, rampant as ever. The ones on ebay are items being sold with the actual Disney characters in them.
You can buy things like official Disney embroidery patterns and stuff for your embroidery machines, or official Disney images to use in actual physical products, maybe the Ebay stuff is something like that?
You can still see the "Disney-Inspired" kits (notably, Toy Story) on her blog... at least for now. If she reads here, that will probably come down as well.
I almost feel bad for her, because she says she worked so hard on it, its her favorite kit she's made, and the biggest kit she's made, but geeeesh, common sense, girl! Why would you think its okay to rip off Disney??
I honestly think she didn't know. I think maybe someone told her, so she removed them. If I were her, i'd just keep them to scrap my own pics with and redo the kits and leave out the characters.
I'm late on this conversation about tags, but I need to say my bit.
I very strongly object to the objectifying of women. Big, fake boobs and small little waists are not realistic. You only need to do a search for plastic surgery gone wrong to see what happens when we raise our girls to believe they need to look like that to be attractive.
From the replies here (I think they are all the same person) there is a logic ump being made that if people object to those images, they must be objecting to the sexualization of women as a whole, and that they must be jealous.
This is not the case.
What we are objecting to is women furthering the stereotypes that you need to be skinny with big boobs to be sexy. We get enough of that from the media we don't need to do it to each other.
Take the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty as a fantastic example of how to celebrate women without objectifying them.
As for exploring your sexual side via your siggies - I applaud that. However I don't think it belongs in your place of work. Just like if you worked at a retail outlet you wouldn't show up in the S&M getup you wear to the Fetish Night at the club. (unless your work is in the industry of course, which digital scrapbooking is not).
As for being jealous or a prude ... yes, I am fat. But I have the most amazing sex life, complete with a closet full of toys and costumes. My husband and I have a monthly portion of our budget set aside for sex-play. He absolutely love me for my curves. So no, I am not jealous, because I wouldn't want it any other way. Nor am I a prude by any standard.
I don't buy my daughters Barbies, nor do any of my friends. If Barbie were a real human being she would not be able to stand up. I don't want my girls thinking that is beautiful.
Other things that I object to that women regularly did or had done to them to be 'beautiful' include removing a rib from their rib cage to fit a corset and foot binding.
Wow. Check out this video to see how much one "little" copyright infringement can cost you. (easily up to $500,000.00 and more by the time legal fees are included, if you try to steal from someone who decides to pursue you legally)
It is long, but very interesting and detailed, and based on someone's multiple experiences with suing over copyright (or trademark) infringement.
note: he does state that in order to go this far legally, you need to have your material officially registered with the copyright office. You also need a good attorney or legal team. (Which, of course, Disney has)
She has a note on her blog that someone left a "mean and pointless" comment about these kits and her copyright infringement. Well, I did it AND it was neither mean nor pointless. I stated the facts - that she was in violation of Walt Disney copyrights and trademarks by selling products with their characters in them. I asked what she would do if someone created a kit with her original art and then said it was "Laurie Scrap's Inspired". I asked how it was that she, as an artist and businesswoman, could find it ok to rip off the art of another artist. I called her a thief. None of this is mean or pointless. It might have offended her soft sensibility - but she will live.
She rambles that I should have contacted her first. Why? Did she bother to contact Disney first to ask if what she was selling was legally approved with them?
She also doesn't think she has created anything with conflict. I would imagine that the Mickey Mouse items - whether in silhouette or not are still trademarks and she has flipping Snow White and the Dwarfs in another kit - but yeah, she hasn't crossed any lines. Oh and other designers told her she was ok. Well then, that just makes everything legal because everyone BUT Disney gives you the nod.
You can buy things like official Disney embroidery patterns and stuff for your embroidery machines, or official Disney images to use in actual physical products, maybe the Ebay stuff is something like that?
_________________________________
the companies that make those patterns have purchased distribution and licensing agreements with Disney. This is not cheap and most small vendors on Ebay probably do not have the funds - because each image is licensed separately.
I refuse to feel sorry for Laurie's Scraps if she's too stupid to know AHEAD OF TIME that what she did was copyright infringement. Seriously, how dumb can one be?
Her CU stuff is crap, too. I liked one of her layered templates and the quality was so poor that I wound up deleting it and putting it on my list of people never to buy from again (like Royanna).
You can buy things like official Disney embroidery patterns and stuff for your embroidery machines, or official Disney images to use in actual physical products, maybe the Ebay stuff is something like that?
You can bet your bippy that those embroidery patterns are for personal use only and not for people to embroider stuff to sell at Etsy. If Disney gets wind they will come after those people too.
big surprise. That's well over 15 designers, I know it's more but can't remember the exact figure, that have left SBG in the last 12 months. July 24, 2010 4:37 AM
----------------------------- But yet, exclusivity works? does it work anywhere besides SSD? SSD has a lot more going for it besides exclusivity that makes it so successful.
note: he does state that in order to go this far legally, you need to have your material officially registered with the copyright office. You also need a good attorney or legal team. (Which, of course, Disney has)
July 24, 2010 3:14 PM -------
Too bad if you live in a country that doesn't have a copyright office.
Other things that I object to that women regularly did or had done to them to be 'beautiful' include removing a rib from their rib cage to fit a corset and foot binding.
July 24, 2010 2:34 PM -----------
Apparently the rib removal is an urban myth, but I do agree with you wholeheartedly.
You can bet your bippy that those embroidery patterns are for personal use only and not for people to embroider stuff to sell at Etsy. If Disney gets wind they will come after those people too.
July 24, 2010 8:22 PM
--------------
Exactly! I've bought patterns off Etsy made by the seller and they are not be reproduced in any way, shape or form for resale. I can't see Disney, being a huge corporation, being any different. It's that whole, I bought it, I own it mentality. It's all very well, until something of theirs is stolen and then all hell breaks loose.
Yes, Monica (MGL) owns SUN, and has all along. July 24, 2010 9:41 PM
---------------------- She hasn't owned it all along. Nicole Seitler (who also owns TDC) owned it only a few months ago. I don't know if MGL owns it now, but all along is not true.
Wall-E looks a lot like Number Five from Short Circuit. ________ I just watched Short circuit 2 the other day and I was thinking the exact same thing. lol
All I know is that my family and I were watching Wall-E a few night ago, and we had just seen Short Circuit a few week earlier and everyone remarked on the resemblance.
"I liked one of her layered templates and the quality was so poor that I wound up deleting it and putting it on my list of people never to buy from again (like Royanna)."
How is the quality poor in templates? Can you explain more please? I'm a bit confused because you must have liked the design since you saw the preview and bought it.
She has a note on her blog that someone left a "mean and pointless" comment about these kits and her copyright infringement. --------------
Wah, wah, wah. She knows she did wrong, which is why she's crying into her apron. When are they going to learn?
---------------------------- I left a comment on that post on her blog saying that nobody was mean and she should be grateful she was warned before Disney caught her out but she deleted it of course LOL. Some stupid fool advised her that it was okay to give those disney kits away as "free add ons" and that would be okay then. LOL. Stupid people. I just left her another NOT MEAN message saying she can't give them away free either. That's sure to be deleted too. She "may" have been ill informed before but now I believe she's just plain stupid if she still thinks she's done nothing wrong.
I can never understand why a person acts like that. We are all just grateful for your work Laurie. I have no idea about copyright issues, but i can tell you that what i see with other designers is that when something is too obvious its Disney, they offer it free as a add-on to the kit for all to download. That way the person that buy your kit also have all that coordinates so well. Keep up your fantastic work :) Reply
* Laurie's Scraps says: 07/24/2010 at 6:17 pm
That is a good idea. Maybe I will do that as well. Thank you for the encouraging words instead of the not so nice ones. I appreciate you as well. *hugs*
And above the "new" preview of the kit (she removed the Disney images) she says to look out for "freebies to match the kit soon" so it looks like she's still planning on giving those images away. She's either arrogant or stupid.
How is the quality poor in templates? Can you explain more please? I'm a bit confused because you must have liked the design since you saw the preview and bought it.
I liked the preview--fun design. However, when you get the templates open, there are jaggies all over the place. Not good at all.
Oh , the delicious irony of Iara (Baers Garten Designs) talking about "original inspiration", "making things based on own ideas", said the "creator" of Bracket Templates pirated off of Susan Bartolini.
I think we need to take her designs and give them all away on our own blogs. Change the colors around to make them fit a kit you already have and make them 'free add-ons'. We'll see how she swallows that one.
Seriously, how can people be so stupid? For anyone to think they can just take any trademarked and licensed material and sell it/give it away and claim copyright to it is just plain dumb. I don't care how good you can draw a picture of Mickey Mouse--It's still Mickey Mouse and it's not yours to claim copyright to. Someone send her a link here so she can't delete posts.
So where are the mods? Why even allow people to post for Disney or Barbie "inspired"...and worse yet, yank out those previews. Maybe Disney will find out and close them down. what do the mods do there anyway??
Is anyone else watching this drama between SBG and Cassel play out in the DCR?
If this ... http://shop.scrapbookgraphics.com/PreFABs-Pop-Ups-Fairytales-Edition.html ... is the item in question, I can't believe Maya thought her was innovative for creating them.
These have been on Gunhilde's blog for ages ... with a tutorial on how to create them. What an idiot!
If you can't read the DCR, i'm sure someone here that can will rehash the story for you.
Anonymous said... How is the quality poor in templates? Can you explain more please? I'm a bit confused because you must have liked the design since you saw the preview and bought it.
I liked the preview--fun design. However, when you get the templates open, there are jaggies all over the place. Not good at all.
July 25, 2010 11:37 AM
She means templates for elements (for instance a layered flower) not a template for a LO! Think before you write!
Cassel saw something at SBG and decided she wanted to make a script that did that. She asked the designer and the designer said no.
She posted a vague thread in DCR asking if someone can copyright an idea and would it be ok if she did it anyway.
Maya came along and said that Cassel has been doing this to a few of her designers and in this case this idea is super brand new and innovative and no one in the history of the internet has ever done it.
Then someone came along and guessed what product they were talking about, along with posting a link to a tutorial on Gunhild Storeide's blog, which is almost certainly how the designer did it since they match exactly.
Now Maya looks like a dumbass, and Cassel is being touted a hero. Despite the fact that she's apparently going from store to store looking for ideas to turn into scripts rather than having an original idea of her own. Not to mention causing the drama of bringing that thread to the DCR in the first place.
If you can't read the DCR, i'm sure someone here that can will rehash the story for you.
July 25, 2010 4:33 PM
----
Er, why don't you seeing as you the one who brought it up?
I remember seeing that product at SBG a few days ago and thought, oh, Gunhilde. I can't believe the number of kits that have her stuff in them. It's so lame. Not Gunhilde's stuff, but the fact that so called designers use her stuff to sell, KWIM?
Maya came along and said that Cassel has been doing this to a few of her designers and in this case this idea is super brand new and innovative and no one in the history of the internet has ever done it. ------
That is hysterical, because even Gunhilde doing it isn't super brand new. Some people don't get out much, do they?
The product in question isn't even a fantastic product...a novelty maybe for a specialized layout but really how often would you use something like that?
Although I don't think Cassel was right, she shouldn't have been trying to make money off of someone else's idea .. I think it's hilarious that Maya thought it was so "innovative and never been done in digi before". Bad thing is other designers at that site were defending their fellow designer thinking it was her original idea when it so obviously wasn't. Too bad all the SBG kiss asses that shop there can't read the DCR and see what a fool Maya made of herself.
Can't you just imagine it ... there she is, thinking she had found a designer that had came up with a wonderful technique that she was going to make a ton of money off of ... only to find out that it was ripped off from a freebie blog. I'm rolling, so freaking funny!!!
Bad thing is other designers at that site were defending their fellow designer thinking it was her original idea when it so obviously wasn't. ---------------
And right there is the problem. People either accusing or defending without knowing all the facts.
I'm just wondering if the SBG designer was asked and said it was her own idea.
Cassel doesn't look like a hero. Maya slandered her left right and center and then got really mad when the mods edited it out. Maya was the one who said all Cassel does is look for other people's things to copy - and now it's being stated here on this blog as fact. So Maya did her own damage.
I think it's sweet how Maya comes out of this with pie all over her face. So much for this brilliant innovative new designer she is so proud of.
wv: pheth - the noise you make when you stick out your tongue and blow hard at the person who just made a fool of herself.
Cassel is just a drama queen in addicted to be the center of attention. Maya wrote something but her posts got edited by a mod. Guess who's a mod at DST? Cassel.
I still don't believe Cassel is making money. Her stuff is N.A.S.T.Y It is the most awful stuff I have ever seen online. Why are we making such a big deal over this?
It has nothing to do with Cassel's stuff and whether anyone likes it or not. It's about a cocky shop owner who thinks she invented digiscrapping. At least that's the vibe I got from her snarky comments. No one's defending Cassel, but Maya was way out of line. She said some nasty things about Cassel that were uncalled for, because she "thought" one of her designers invented something that she would greatly profit off of. This just goes to prove that everything that's been stated about Maya on this blog, is true. She's a snarky, snotty bitch in my opinion. I just hope she doesn't treat her customers like that. I'm sure she doesn't, she's probably over sugarly sweet to them. Most people like her are. Not to mention the snotty replies by her designers. They are all getting a little too egotistical for me. I am writing SBG off my list for places to shop forever.
On a side note, i'm not defending Cassel in any way. I flat out don't like her and never have. From all the stuff i've read that she's been posting in the DCR, she's been accused of this before, stealing others ideas and coding. I recall reading another thread a while back where someone outside of digiworld called her out for the same thing. Makes you wonder.
But regardless, digi is no different than any other industry. One designer can make something and if another designer chooses to, they can make something similar. You can't copyright an idea. If Cassel had just released her script instead of asking the designer (who's a freaking template designer at that .. we so need more of those, lol), none of this drama would have even happened.
Linda was the one that edited Maya's posts, NOT Cassel.
You saying that just makes you sound like Maya. Your jumping to conclusions and smearing somebodies name in the process to win a point in an argument.
July 25, 2010 10:50 PM -----
Hey chill out!
I wasn't trying to defend Maya and I didn't know that Linda, whoever that is, was the mod who edited her. I just thought it's quite suspicious that Cassel is a mod at DST. She could have been the one to edit posts in her favor. Who the hell gave her that much power at DST anyway? That's the biggest joke ever.
She means templates for elements (for instance a layered flower) not a template for a LO! Think before you write!
Agreed. I wonder if she means the layered paper templates? I downloaded some when she had them as freebies on her blog. They look good at thumbnail size, but when you get them at 100% they're full of jaggies. MAde me think she doesn't know how to recolor items. I'm betting the quality on her kit items (copyright infringement or not) isn't any better.
You're right, cassell's stuff isn't that good. I'll give her credit for being able to actually create scripts but her ego is far bigger than her talent.
Grannyart is nothing but rendered poser stuff. She sure does have A LOT of it, though, doesn't she? Not to say that she hasn't spent hundreds of dollars and doesn't mind just giving it away but it does make you wonder. You can't be absolutely sure that other designers are using her stuff,though when the models can be purchased and rendered by anyone. DAZ 3D is free. Personally, I'm sick of seeing poser crap in kits. It's like the whole acrylic phase--it was neat at first and now it's just annoying because it's everywhere.
There once was a designer who was an action maker who wound up accusing half the digital designers of copyright violations but after the fact many found out it was all a bunch of horse pucky. Now it's not hard to copy an action, you just have to know how to do it but if you are stupid enough not to make your own actions in the first place.......
I'm not defending Cassel either, other then the fact that at least she tried to do what was right and ask the designer of course not knowing that when it came down to it the designer had copied someone else's work. You can be sure that Maya won't be back to explain her designer's explanation. Just make sure you check the store to see that designer gone.
Her designers who weighed in didn't come back to say anything else either. LOL they had egg all over their face.
As far as going from store to store all one has to do is look in a product gallery to get an idea of what's out there, has been out, and half of it being called copyright infringement is just plain ignorant. Why people come here with site links and then don't know what they are looking at, or whether a person might have permission to use items is just dumb. But there are a lot of dumb people in this business and I just wish to hell they'd go away!!
I'm not defending Cassel either, other then the fact that at least she tried to do what was right and ask the designer of course not knowing that when it came down to it the designer had copied someone else's work ________________________________ See why being original is so important? The next time you (generally speaking) want to copy or be "inspired" by something, stop and think whether that person was "inspired" by someone before that. Even Gunhild--what's her name--with the 'original' one copied the idea from a greeting card.
Personally, I'm sick of seeing poser crap in kits. It's like the whole acrylic phase--it was neat at first and now it's just annoying because it's everywhere.
__________________________________
This is so true. There's a ton of poser stuff out there that people think is original art. Just look at Joelle - at lot of her backgrounds and elements are poser and DAZ.
I don't mean to rehash the Disney thing, but I was reading the ISO thread regarding Disney kits.. http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/2533379-post90.html
She says anything Disney related, even the mouse ears are a no-no but yet she has the ears in her signature. LOL I just thought it was kind of funny.
I just wanted to make a comment about this whole Cassel and Maya conversation. Though I will say I don't use scripts nor use the program they are made for. The issue here I really think is that a designer Cassel went directly to the designer in question out of respect. Since it appears that Cassel realized that this idea has been around for years and years, she was not happy with her answer from the designer. I like the idea that she brought it to the forum for some feedback. What I don't like is that a campaign was started I am sure by Maya for all the store designers to go into the forum and say how unprofessional this way. Oh come on ladies - stop acting like children. And then Maya deleting her posts as someone censored her comments. Again childlike. Maya as usual likes to bully her way through something that really she has no business doing. She calls them her designers - what she owns people. The designer in question I am sure is an adult that can take care of herself and doesn't need Maya's help nor every single designer on the site defending her. The designer in question didn't even respond. I just wish Maya would keep her nose out of other people business - She seems to think she invented digital designing and owns the rights to just about anything that is designed by anyone, not limited to just product. Colors and shapes or anything that is digitally made. I don't understand why she thinks she is god like person. She made an ass out of herself which she normally does. You all have talked on why she goes through designers - well it is obvious to some people and designers why. She is not a nice person and there are a handful of designers that stay for reasons I cant explain. I could never work for a person that is truly into herself as much as Maya is. She probably wakes up in the morning and has a party at the mirror saying I love me, I am the best, I am not a bitch, on and on.
I say rock on to all the designers that aren't afraid to go face to face with each other. I also say that is you have a good idea, love a shape or color design. Trust me most of what is put out these days is nothing more that inspiration from somewhere. Nothing is really new these days.
If you're a designer and you make something, even if not an original idea, would you want a script/action maker coming along asking your permission to make such an action or script of your item to redistribute as a commercial-use item? Why would you say yes? I can't imagine why she would've even asked in the first place. She obviously wanted attention because anyone with half a brain knows you can't copyright an idea. Unless she really is stupid and actually didn't know that.
Cassell should have just shut the hell up and made it because absolutely NO permission was needed. Nothing needed to be discussed anywhere publicly about this because it wasn't anything worth bitching about. Apparently, all both of them (Maya and cassell) did was make themselves look like morons.
It really pays to be smart, keep to yourself, worry only about yourself and keep your god-damned nose out of everyone else's business. Not something too many designers do today.
"Welcome to the world of women, drama and digiscrapbooking. It's almost as good as watching the Real Housewives of New York City." Or New Jersey...are we in for a little "table flipping" OHHH, I hope so, don't want to miss that.
"Welcome to the world of women, drama and digiscrapbooking. It's almost as good as watching the Real Housewives of New York City." Or New Jersey...are we in for a little "table flipping" OHHH, I hope so, don't want to miss that.
^^^^^
If there was a way to flip tables over the internet, Maya or one of her designers would have invented this new and innovative idea and no one else would be able to do it ;)
I didn't read the forum thread in question. But someone mod edited what Maya wrote? Did they at least put "removed for breaking some rule" or just cut out parts of what was posted? That just seems wrong. According to someone on here it was Linda who did it and not Cassel. How fishy. I don't want any moderators "editing" my posts and potentially changing what I had originally written. Twist a few things around, remove a word here or there, and the meaning is different.
It's downright amazing the amount of free stuff that designers are using in their kits and reselling for profit. I see Granny Art in almost 1/3 of them.
For the scrappers on here who want some free stuff - visit her blog.
http://grannyart.blogspot.com/
I was just noticing that and being annoyed by it. There is a designer at Enchanted Studio Scraps who is selling stuff from granny art for CU. Not changing it in the slightest or even putting it in a pack with other stuff. I had to do a double take on it, but sure enough, there it is!
I don't mean to rehash the Disney thing, but I was reading the ISO thread regarding Disney kits.. http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/2533379-post90.html
She says anything Disney related, even the mouse ears are a no-no but yet she has the ears in her signature. LOL I just thought it was kind of funny. ------------------------- sorry but Im just reading up too after being away for a while. What a disgrace. She removed all the Disney stuff I guess now..
This..http://www.lauriesscraps.com/blog/?p=2162 has the TOONTOWN name, which is owned by Disney. Now, I may be wrong but my kids play this game online at http://toontown.go.com/ almost weekly so it stuck out to me easily. Still, I think it's wrong...for sale or not. So is she now just giving away the pieces in question to avoid copywrite? Wow, I love it when people find a way to justify their own stupidity and stealing.
Here's an idea Laurie - get a real and original idea! She's just another nobody designer looking to rip off anyone to make a buck. Total shit.
Toontown is one of the attractions at the Disney parks, which the game is based on. The name Toontown is as trademarked as the name Disney and all its characters.
I didn't read the forum thread in question. But someone mod edited what Maya wrote? Did they at least put "removed for breaking some rule" or just cut out parts of what was posted? That just seems wrong. According to someone on here it was Linda who did it and not Cassel. How fishy. I don't want any moderators "editing" my posts and potentially changing what I had originally written. Twist a few things around, remove a word here or there, and the meaning is different.
July 26, 2010 1:11 PM ------------
That's exactly what happened. So, how come Linda edited Maya's post and no one else's? And what was the rule broken? I wasn't aware that we were not allowed to share our opinions and if they are not on the majority's side, we were going to be censored. DST is lame and full of bullshit.
Editing someone's post by removing words is much worse than just deleting their post. What right does a DST moderator have in changing/removing/editing someone's post. I understand when someone writes I hate XYZ store and then the moderator used to put something like I hate REMOVED BY MOD store. At least it's obvious it was changed. The DST mods are on a power trip.
My understanding was the mod removed the part that was a personal attack. Maya went a bit off the handle about Cassel not having ideas, trolling around for ideas to steal, 'jumping on the bandwagon' etc.
The mod was obviously flustered by it, because she gave Maya the reason that it twas opinion not fact ... when what she was really doing was editing out the personal attack.
I actually kinda wish the personal attack was still there so everyone who hadn't read it yet could see what an arrogant sanctimonious bitch she was.
Anonymous said... My understanding was the mod removed the part that was a personal attack. Maya went a bit off the handle about Cassel not having ideas, trolling around for ideas to steal, 'jumping on the bandwagon' etc.
The mod was obviously flustered by it, because she gave Maya the reason that it twas opinion not fact ... when what she was really doing was editing out the personal attack.
I actually kinda wish the personal attack was still there so everyone who hadn't read it yet could see what an arrogant sanctimonious bitch she was.
Wow. You really hate, Maya. I get that and I don't care. However, editing someone's post without stating in the post is not right. Writing it later in a different post, oh by the way, I edited your post, is not okay. Would Linda have done that for anyone being attacked or just Cassel or another DST mod. I hate power trips and censorship.
That's exactly what happened. So, how come Linda edited Maya's post and no one else's? And what was the rule broken? I wasn't aware that we were not allowed to share our opinions and if they are not on the majority's side, we were going to be censored. DST is lame and full of bullshit.
July 26, 2010 5:13 PM
-------
Mods have always been able to edit posts, why the fuss about it now?
Wow. You really hate, Maya. I get that and I don't care. However, editing someone's post without stating in the post is not right. Writing it later in a different post, oh by the way, I edited your post, is not okay. Would Linda have done that for anyone being attacked or just Cassel or another DST mod. I hate power trips and censorship.
July 26, 2010 5:40 PM
-------
Of for fuck's sake, posts have been edited before in heated discussions when it has come to personal attacks. This is not the first time. It may be the first time some of you have noticed, but it's not the first time it's happened.
Whenever a mod has edited a post before, it's right there in the post, reason for edit.
I don't want any moderators "editing" my posts and potentially changing what I had originally written. Twist a few things around, remove a word here or there, and the meaning is different.
July 26, 2010 1:11 PM
----------
OMG, seriously? How egotistical or paranoid are you? Do you honestly think the mods have nothing better to do than troll the forums and change posts?
If you're so paranoid about it, stay out of stupid arguments and you won't have to worry about being censored. Or start your own forum, get it good and popular and then don't moderate it.
I don't really hate Maya. I do think her behavior in that thread tells a lot about her though and it would be great for that not to have been wiped from history.
As for the partial editing - no one re-arranged words it was just a removal of the personal attack. It does happen all the time.
I don't really hate Maya. I do think her behavior in that thread tells a lot about her though and it would be great for that not to have been wiped from history. -------------
She deleted her posts because she is a spoiled brat who got proven wrong.
------------
And it's not the first time either. In the whole bracket shape debacle, she kept insisting that her designer had not stolen the template, when in fact, it turned out that the designer had stolen it.
And before anyone goes on about the whole you can't copyright a shape, that wasn't the point.
Check out this video. I guess Disney really is out looking for infringement and won't stop at even a family on food stamps. Personally, I would NEVER even think of producing anything Disney related. To me it's like stealing the inspiration from another designer (which it really is..) and not original. I have a hard time understanding why laurie would try to justify giving away the pieces she removed (since that is still distributing). Do you think she could still be liable for what she did profit on the Disney related items?
There's a local business who uses disney characters here as a way to attract customers, too. I'm not sure if they advertise them or not. Whether you're stealing from a large company like Disney or a newbie nobody designer, stealing is stealing. However, common sense dictates if you're going to be an idiot and steal ideas anyway, do it from a newbie nobody designer who doesn't have millions of dollars and a huge legal defense team on retainer to come after you. LOL
Check out this video. I guess Disney really is out looking for infringement and won't stop at even a family on food stamps. Personally, I would NEVER even think of producing anything Disney related. To me it's like stealing the inspiration from another designer (which it really is..) and not original. I have a hard time understanding why laurie would try to justify giving away the pieces she removed (since that is still distributing). Do you think she could still be liable for what she did profit on the Disney related items?
http://www.wftv.com/video/16824445/index.html
------------------------- There has to be more to that news story than what they are saying. What about all the businesses that rent or sell costumes or the businesses that provide characters for children's parties? Why do they get away with it? I doubt each and every party character business has gotten permission from Disney. (Google 'characters for children's parties' and you'll find tons of businesses using Disney character costumes.)
What about all the businesses that rent or sell costumes or the businesses that provide characters for children's parties? ------------------------ Unless they have a license from Disney to sell them, they're breaking the law. Nothing more to that very simple fact or to that story.
Just like digiscrapers can't take images and sell Disney-themed kits with them, costume designers can't just make costumes and sell them. Card makers can't make cards with them. Clothing designers can't make clothes with them, so on, blah, blah, blah. Meet all the requirements of Disney's licensing application, including the bucks to pay their royalty fees and you can. Obviously, there are legitimate companies that do.
What I find to be hillarious in the whole debaucle is that Baers Garten is in there talking about not stealing other designers' ideas.
Iara (Baers Garten) said: "There was no original inspiration to create the script, the whole thing is based on someone's else product and idea."
So, it's not okay to use someone else's IDEA, but it's perfectly okay to purchase another designer's product, and use it as an actual template for making her own bracket-album to sell (bracket-album saga with ScrapKitchen at SSD, in which is was clearly proven that Iara used ScrapKitchen's product as a template, because ScrapKitchen's micro-watermark was present in Iara's "new" product!), but it's not okay to use an IDEA. Wow. Pretty clear ethics there. *shakes head*
And back then, Maya came on babbling about how it was a completely innocent mistake of an inexperienced designer. Apparently "ethics" are very different if you are a designer at SBG, and you are allowed to do such things, but no one else better try it. :O
n which is was clearly proven that Iara used ScrapKitchen's product as a template, because ScrapKitchen's micro-watermark was present in Iara's "new" product!) -----------
It was not only proven, in the end, Iara finally admitted to using the shape.
Don't you all just love how Maya applies such a blatant double standard to the industry? Her clearly superior designer will be defended while other people will be vilified.
I'm so glad I am an outsider to all that crap...I wouldn't sell in that store if she paid ME a commission to sell there. Hell, from everything I read here, I don't want to design anything anywhere..what a joke the whole thing is. LOL
For those of you who are just dying to see what Maya posted, here it is, in its unedited glory ...........
I have been trying to avoid chiming in here because Cassel shared her version of the story without mentioning the designer in question and I didn't really think I wanted to draw more attention to it than it deserved. However, she also dragged me into it by private messaging me since it was a designer in my store that she is dealing with.
Since we do not have anything at all to hide here I have no problem with stepping up to try and clarify the situation from the other side as the way the story was presented left a lot of room for speculation with regard to the type of product here. This was not a simple frame with a word on it. As Cassel later stated, this is a product that is entirely new to digital. It is certainly something one can accomplish with paper but in over 7 years of digital scrapbooking this product is actually an original idea to our craft, and HATS OFF to the designer who was smart enough, creative enough and technically apt enough to pull it off on her own. That isn't an easy thing to accomplish in this over-saturated market, but she did it.
It is a new release and there is a lot of expansion room for the product and our designer has every intention of making the most of her idea with further products of the same nature.
Some days ago Cassel emailed her because she had seen our designers design and wanted to create a script that would replicate the technique to sell to her customers. Since our designer is actually new and interning with me, she came to our group of designers to ask what she should do. Everyone advised her to tell Cassel that she could not condone this, that it was her idea and technique and that it would affect her sales negatively if Cassel were to make a script to provide to others. We actually expected that the conversation would end there, but to our surprise we found it continued on here. Regardless of whether or not the designer or her product were mentioned by Cassel in the original post, clearly Cassel still has issues regarding her response to come here in search of support, and to justify her desire to usel someone else's idea.
Our designers have responded here because they are privy to the entire story. This is a clear cut situation in our books and it is not the first time that Cassel has contacted one of our designers asking to make a product from their designs or ideas in a way that would directly and negatively impact their sales. She always approaches with the line that a customer has asked her to make this product and has even stated that she doesn't want to be viewed as a copycat which is why she wants to work WITH our designers rather than simply going ahead and doing it with them being unaware.
I made the mistake of assuming that her contact was asking permission, but when I called Cassel on her refusal to accept the decline for permission, she made a point of telling me that she never actually asked for it. Apparently what she asked for was for the designer to work with her, but she certainly never offered any sharing of profits.
The fact here is simple. She is trying to capitalize on someone else's idea and design and it would seem as though that this is generally the nature of her business. To use the excuse that a million people will eventually have stolen the idea and made products out of it on their own is a lame way of avoiding one's conscience on the matter. What she is doing is wrong and it can not be justified by the fact that if she doesn't do it first, then everyone else will beat her to it.
Further, to step up here and tell us she is doing us a favor by postponing or delaying her product release out of respect for our designer, is ridiculous. There is no doubt that if Cassel releases this product that our designer's sales will drop off immediately, especially when the designers get their hands on the product as a CU release and anyone and everyone can pull this technique off with a click of the mouse. So we are relieved that she is at least seeing the light for the time being, but I would far from call it respectful.
Respectful would be to stop looking at the products of others and see how you can steal it to capitalize for yourself. Just as this idea is something that she thinks anyone could have thought of, I challenge her to come up with her own ideas instead.
In answer to the sideline question regarding originality. I just want to say that in no way would we all be involved in this situation if the question of originality wasn't so clear. There is nothing else in digiland like this product. Currently the only place you can go to buy it is Scrapbookgraphics. If you don't have the skill level (or time) to pull off this technique by yourself, then you need to visit our store to purchase the product to do so.
Cassel knows all this. She has not already simultaneously created a similar product on her own. She has found the product herself and is aiming to replicate it and like I said before this is not the first SBG designers she has contacted to do this to and I am sure that SBG is not the only store she deals with either. Will others eventually take the idea and sell it themselves, most probably so and no doubt Cassel will eventually jump on the bandwagon and feel justified in doing so. However, until then this is simple clear cut case of right and wrong. It is copying someone else's idea. Whether or not we are protected legally is besides the point (and a joke rather because the legal systems carry very little weight over the internet and cross-countries) but this is a matter of conscience. Follow the golden rule!
Again I want to commend my intern designer for coming up with an original and creative idea (in fact, she has come up with two already) in an industry that is so saturated. I am sure my fellow designers and creatives here can relate to the heartfelt disappointment she is meeting for the first time when confronted by this issue.
There is nothing else in digiland like this product. Currently the only place you can go to buy it is Scrapbookgraphics...
However, until then this is simple clear cut case of right and wrong. It is copying someone else's idea. Whether or not we are protected legally is besides the point (and a joke rather because the legal systems carry very little weight over the internet and cross-countries) but this is a matter of conscience. Follow the golden rule!
LMAO!!!! Maya, you really should get a CLUE before you go spouting off about the "originality" of the product and saying that NO ONE has made a digital product like this before. OMG, I couldn't write this comedy script any better if I tried!
See Gunhild's website when she made this exact type of product, with a tutorial that "your" designer probably followed, and it was posted at least 7 MONTHS ago, which is when Gunhild uploaded the product at 4shared.
Maya got all up in arms about baersgarten being accused of piracy and was proven wrong on that one too. You'd think she'd have conversations with her designers BEFORE she goes spouting off. I wonder if she'll come back with a lame story like she did with Lara or if she is hoping this dies a quiet death and gets bumped out of the main page of DCR..
Having said that, I think Cassel is a hack. Maya is correct with her assessment of Cassel--no originality and no respect.
^^^^ Ummm maybe because she comes across as a busy-body know-it-all who has to have her nose in everyones business, tell everyone how to do things, and always has the correct opinion on everything? Just one example: her thread in the DCR where she scolded designers for sending e-mail ads that had "too many" images or were over a certain size. Of course we should all conform to her standards. *rolls eyes*
She should never have been accepted as a moderator at DST; now it's only gotten worse.
Since our designer is actually new and interning with me, she came to our group of designers to ask what she should do. Everyone advised her to tell Cassel that she could not condone this, that it was her idea and technique and that it would affect her sales negatively if Cassel were to make a script to provide to others. ------
Now if this happened, right at that moment the designer in question had the opportunity to say, actually, no, it wasn't my original idea, I followed a tutorial. But it's evident that she did not say anything such thing, which makes her even more of a hack than Cassel. At least Cassel owned up to what she does.
Again I want to commend my intern designer for coming up with an original and creative idea (in fact, she has come up with two already) in an industry that is so saturated. I am sure my fellow designers and creatives here can relate to the heartfelt disappointment she is meeting for the first time when confronted by this issue.
Maya
July 27, 2010 11:50 PM
----------------------------------
So what is the other original and creative idea ? I've been through Studio Dutchie's store and I can't see it !
I wonder if Maya is referring to the "book illusions" series, which, again, has been done before and is neither innovative nor creative with this particular designer.
psst - word on the street ScrapArtist is closing early next month. I hope the subscriptions for Inside the Scrapartist Studio are honored by Amanda Rockwell.
Templates, obviously! No one else is doing them! .......................
Oh no, you're mistaken..they're not templates they're PreFABs! Don't you know if you give a product a different name it becomes an original and inovative idea!
psst - word on the street ScrapArtist is closing early next month. I hope the subscriptions for Inside the Scrapartist Studio are honored by Amanda Rockwell. ---------------------------- GET OUT! How do you know? Any reason they are giving up?
psst - word on the street ScrapArtist is closing early next month. I hope the subscriptions for Inside the Scrapartist Studio are honored by Amanda Rockwell. ---------------------------- GET OUT! How do you know? Any reason they are giving up? .................... tired I guess - same ol sh**, diff day. I haven't ventured there much since they started doing the altered art stuff.. I'm a member of Amanda's forum but it's usually a month behind for downloads & tutorials.
I need to make some of those stupid things and put them up as a blog freebie. I think everyone needs to, to knock that woman's ego down a few hundred notches.
I just love it. You bash DST and say you never go there but obviously enough Designers are signed up in the DCR and run right over here to tell everyone else what's going on.
Why then did you ever sign the agreement for the DCR. If you come here and tell what you shouldn't be telling aren't you just as dishonest and immoral as someone who pirates, copies and does all of the other stuff one knows they shouldn't do and you slam them for. Obviously there are those who need to look at their own motives for what they say and what they do before they slam others. Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you.
I'm a member of Amanda's forum but it's usually a month behind for downloads & tutorials. Um, I am, too, and I think you get a helluva deal for $50 a year. Out of all the people in digiland who make promises and never live up to them, Amanda is one who delivers. I really don't care if it's a "month behind". Better late than never. And when she falls behind, she always includes huge discounts, coupons, free product. Works for me.
Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you. __________________________________
You must be Maya? Pathetic is the word I would use to describe the shit that goes on in the backroom. Why keep it secret? Perhaps because of what it really is ... a place to bash each other or to sell CU.
I'm not the one who exposed this Cassel/Maya/Dutchie debacle but I have no problem with those that did. Scrapbooking stores are no holier or better than any other business in the marketplace. All businesses and their practices should be as transparent as possible so that customers can make informed choices regarding where they want to spend their hard earned dollars.
How dishonest is it for a customer to be led to believe that they would be buying a new and innovative product never before seen in digiland, created by a up and coming hot new designer named Dutchie. Spending hard earned money on this new product. When, come to find out, this Dutchie clearly used a free tutorial and perhaps the free template itself. I know I'd feel ripped off.
People have a RIGHT to know about this type of dishonesty.
Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you. ______________ Pathetic is the only word I can think of to describe the utter bullshit that goes on in this industry. So get off your high horse and go back to your pathetic little "designer resource" world. Most digi designers today couldn't even follow some of the tutorials offered out there, never mind actually CREATE something from scratch. There are actually REAL digital artists out there in the world and about 99.9 percent of them exist outside the digital scrapbooking arena. Digiscrap designers are nothing but wannabes and they're so goddamn catty and jealous, they won't hesitate in looking like an idiot to protect an idea that was taken from someone else in the first place, so STFU.
Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you. ---------------------------------- SHUT THE FUCK UP MAYA! I've been around this industry as long as you. What, you think you've been around much longer than anyone else and that makes you the queen of digi-shit? I have news for you - those of us that are old timers much like yourself have never thought much of your shit attitude..and trust me it really stinks. You never tried to fit in with any of us, are always starting some dramatic shit (yes, even years ago) and never represented this community in any kind of positive way. In fact you always thought you were better. So, news flash bitch..you have always been and will be an indecent, immoral bitch. That stick jammed up your ass is so far up there that it must be the only thing keeping your back straight. I'll speak for most of the design community - WE DONT NEED YOU. DONT WANT YOU AND DONT NEED THE LIKES OF YOU REPRESENTING US. YOU MAKE US ALL LOOK LIKE FOOLS, BRINGING CONSTANT DRAMA TO OUR LITTLE CORNER OF THE WORLD. PLEASE...PLEASE..TAKE YOUR SUB-PAR DESIGNS AND TEAM AND LEAVE. YOU HAVE EMBARASSED THIS COMMUNITY FOR WAY TO LONG.
This has been a long time coming for me and probably most of the community of hard working designers. I've bit my tongue for far to long. Now please..get out!
dayummmmm .... take a chilld pill. You're gonna give yourself an aneurysm.
I may not be a huge Maya fan, but I admire her spirit to go balls to the walls for her designer. Sucks for her that the designer was trying to pass off her stuff as original. Yup, some major egg on the face there.
Cassel is ALWAYS trying to rip off other designer's and approaching them to make scripts.
She should do her own internet surfing to rip off ideas instead of designer's who've already done it.
Lazy thief! No cookie.
If she hasn't approached you to rip off one of your ideas for a "client who asked her to make a script for it" .. you're either A) in the minority or B) not worthy of her scripting theft.
but I admire her spirit to go balls to the walls for her designer. _________________ You're kidding, right? Not only was she way over the top (not to mention, completely incorrect) with her defense of said designer, she made herself and the designer look like fools. She doesn't own "her" designers. They don't need defending. This is business, not a hen house, so please stop behaving like a bunch of cackling old chickens.
1. Designers and store owners, take some business 101 classes. A.S.A.P.
2. Design your own stuff, run your own store and stop worrying about what everyone else is doing.
3. Cassel should not be asking permission in the first place to create a new product from the idea of an existing item. You don't have to be nice, you don't have to play fair.
4. Designers being asked are even more stupid then Cassel for asking if they say yes. Why the hell would you?
5. Designers--if you are faced with this question, say no and be done with it. Don't go asking for advice or get all wishy-washy "OMG, what do I do" with it. Just say NO or, even better, just ignore the request. Your response is moot, anyway. Or should be.
6. Store owners--just mind your own fucking business. If you are so egotistical that you can't let the parties in question handle it themselves, at least keep it between you and the parties involved. PLEASE don't drag it into such a drama magnet like the DCR. If you must do such a thing, don't cry when you come out looking like a fool and everyone talks about how much of a frothing, rabid rat you are in a place like this.
^^^ From what it sounds like though, Cassel didn't know it was an already existing blog freebie. She thought it was original too. That's what I'm saying. She's too lazy to go thief from the net, just from other designer's who've already done it.
The way I see it, Maya was trying to stand behind a newbie designer. But, she got burned. Big time.
Is Dutchie still selling @ SBG? Have they removed said product? From what I understand of CU you can use GH's stuff as long as you credit her in the TOU. Did she do that?
Cassel didn't know it was an already existing blog freebie. She thought it was original too. ___________ So what? What if it actually was? Take a look around...PS styles (especially wood, acrylic, glass, etc), novelty flair buttons, textured papers, layout templates, extracted bows, actions galore to create everything from the stunning to the stupid. I could go on and on and on and on.
(sorry...Word verification I just had to share: Wowee. As in Wowee, people sure are stupid.
I didn't quite get your point of whether or not cassel thought it was an original product in the first place. As in, so what if it actually was an original product?
YOU 3. Cassel should not be asking permission in the first place to create a new product from the idea of an existing item. You don't have to be nice, you don't have to play fair. *********************** ME Cassel didn't know it was an already existing blog freebie. She thought it was original too. ___________ YOU So what? What if it actually was? Take a look around...PS styles (especially wood, acrylic, glass, etc), novelty flair buttons, textured papers, layout templates, extracted bows, actions galore to create everything from the stunning to the stupid. I could go on and on and on and on.
...................
I didn't get that in correlation to what you were saying.
You may wanna calm down a little. It's not good for your heart to be wound so tight.
I'd hate to lose such a font of wisdom who tells everybody what to do and where to go due to the fact that she's had a heart attack.
SHUT THE FUCK UP MAYA! I've been around this industry as long as you. What, you think you've been around much longer than anyone else and that makes you the queen of digi-shit? I have news for you - those of us that are old timers much like yourself have never thought much of your shit attitude..and trust me it really stinks. You never tried to fit in with any of us, are always starting some dramatic shit (yes, even years ago) and never represented this community in any kind of positive way. In fact you always thought you were better. So, news flash bitch..you have always been and will be an indecent, immoral bitch. That stick jammed up your ass is so far up there that it must be the only thing keeping your back straight. I'll speak for most of the design community - WE DONT NEED YOU. DONT WANT YOU AND DONT NEED THE LIKES OF YOU REPRESENTING US. YOU MAKE US ALL LOOK LIKE FOOLS, BRINGING CONSTANT DRAMA TO OUR LITTLE CORNER OF THE WORLD. PLEASE...PLEASE..TAKE YOUR SUB-PAR DESIGNS AND TEAM AND LEAVE. YOU HAVE EMBARASSED THIS COMMUNITY FOR WAY TO LONG. --- From one designer to another that has also been around for quite some time---HERE HERE! Im not sure why Maya thinks she rules the roost around this community. She's a know it all vaginal hemorrhoid.
.....YADA YADA YADA...... I'll speak for most of the design community - .....YADA YADA YADA......
July 28, 2010 1:56 PM
Errrr, not. Your diatribe certainly doesn't represent this member of the design community. I may or may not like or support Maya, but I most assuredly do not support your rant. And if most do, guess I'm an oddity and will be content to remain so. I'd like to think most of the design community can communicate and comport itself on a more erudite and intelligent manner.
I still don't get what point you're trying to make. But whatever.
My numbered list was basically a list of things that should have been followed and if it was, none of this would have seen the light of day.
I wasn't getting your point by saying: "From what it sounds like though, Cassel didn't know it was an already existing blog freebie. She thought it was original too. That's what I'm saying." I'm not sure what that has to do with what I said. Whether it's an original product or not makes no difference. My reference to the styles and such was simply to point out that this is hardly the first time designers have copied off of each other. It's called competition and in this business, competition is never-ending. People don't treat it as a business, though, they get way too personal. It ain't personal. It's business.
And I'm not quite sure where your anger is coming from? I thought I was having a discussion. The word verification thingie I put in there was a random statement against people in general, not you, personally. I don't even know who you are, which makes your comment about me being so wound tight or whatever seem even more silly.
"Errrr, not. Your diatribe certainly doesn't represent this member of the design community. I may or may not like or support Maya, but I most assuredly do not support your rant. And if most do, guess I'm an oddity and will be content to remain so. I'd like to think most of the design community can communicate and comport itself on a more erudite and intelligent manner."
OP did say MOST, not ALL but wait while I pull out my Websters to decipher what the hey you are saying, guess I can't communicate or comport myself too good..dem big words confuzal me..
What I said was ... " I didn't get that in correlation to what you were saying.
You may wanna calm down a little. It's not good for your heart to be wound so tight.
I'd hate to lose such a font of wisdom who tells everybody what to do and where to go due to the fact that she's had a heart attack.
WV sestifyi -- did that sestify? hahaha fyi."
......
Where do you hostility in this? It's just facts. Nothing personal. You do seem a bit over zealous but no biggie. I'll quote you in saying ...
The word verification thingie I put in there was a random statement against people in general, not you, personally. I don't even know who you are, which makes your comment about me being so wound tight or whatever seem even more silly.
People have a RIGHT to know about this type of dishonesty.
But you don't have the right to bring the drama to a smak blog since you signed an agreement not to or are you to dense to get that fact. You sign an agreement that you won't take anything out of the DCR and here you are spouting word for word so really what does that make you????? Am I suppose to trust you. Yeah right. I wouldn't trust you as far as I could throw you. Don't put this off on me. I didn't bring the drama here. You'd be surprised how well word gets around and they don't have to read it on a smak blog. Try another excuse.
It's pretty much a given that things from the DCR will be posted here - anonymously. There's not other free place to discuss this stuff, and we need to discuss it.
As for admiring Maya for going 'balls to the walls' for her designer,s he could have done that quite well without attacking Cassel. Also it's a good idea to get your facts straight before you defend something that just isn't true. How hard would it have been for her to google 'pop out letters' before she made the statements about them being so innovative and impressive?
it's a good idea to get your facts straight before you defend something that just isn't true. How hard would it have been for her to google 'pop out letters' before she made the statements about them being so innovative and impressive? ............. can't argue with you there.
FIRST .... How do you happen to have the unedited version of the DCR convo? You MUST be a DST mod. Niccceeeeee. Not.
SECOND ....
"she could have done that quite well without attacking Cassel."
************
What I read from the oh-so-helpful DST mod poster ... it doesn't sound like she was attacking Cassel. Sounds like she was fed up with Cassel's business practices of sniffing around with a "customer who who asked me for a script for this." I've had it happen to me too.
Whether it's something that's been done to death or something mildly different ... why can't she find her own shit?
I'm fed up myself with her asking to script my stuff. It gets old really fast.
Just in case you didn`t get notifications for PM (Happens to me sometimes), I am sending you here, the same request as I sent in PM.
I was asked by a customer, to make a script that would be somewhat similar to _____. I think I can do that no problem, but I wanted to ask your permission first since this seems to be YOUR idea. I would not want to seem like I am a copycat and taking everyone else's original ideas. Cassel
When, come to find out, this Dutchie clearly used a free tutorial and perhaps the free template itself. I ----------
From looking at the product, I'd say she used the free template. She didn't even bother to be original enough to move the word to the top or bottom of the page, but right down the middle, just like the template. Lame!
.....YADA YADA YADA...... I'll speak for most of the design community - .....YADA YADA YADA......
July 28, 2010 1:56 PM
Errrr, not. Your diatribe certainly doesn't represent this member of the design community. I may or may not like or support Maya, but I most assuredly do not support your rant. And if most do, guess I'm an oddity and will be content to remain so. I'd like to think most of the design community can communicate and comport itself on a more erudite and intelligent manner.
psst - word on the street ScrapArtist is closing early next month. I hope the subscriptions for Inside the Scrapartist Studio are honored by Amanda Rockwell.
July 28, 2010 6:31 AM -----------
Big surprise, not! This is long over due. Nancie hasn't really been interested in that site for a long time. I get the impression she treats it like a dog, that she only pays attention to after it's piddled on the floor or chewed up the furniture.
that whole Cassel/Maya thing is funny. those pop up letters are so original! In fact, they are so new and original that there are atleast 3 filters that I know of (that I've had for YEARS) that will do it with just one click. Yep, original idea right there!
I say let Cassel make the script, and then report her to the filter companies for ripping off their products.
Is Dutchie still selling @ SBG? Have they removed said product? From what I understand of CU you can use GH's stuff as long as you credit her in the TOU. Did she do that?
July 28, 2010 1:07 PM -------
There is no reason for Dutchie to not be selling as she didn't break any rules. There is also no reason for the removal of the product, unless she didn't follow Gunhilde's TOU. I don't know if Gunhilde was credited, as I never bought Dutchie's product.
I say let Cassel make the script, and then report her to the filter companies for ripping off their products.
You're such an idiot. She doesn't need to use a filter to make her script and most filters can be used for commercial use. Sheesh I can't believe the idiots on this board.
And this makes you ..... what? Idiot Chief? Head Idiot? A bigiot? (sorry weak combo of bigot & idiot)Although, I must admit, I kind of like Bigot Idiot.
Just want to clarify on how you'd like to be addressed.
I was asked by a customer, to make a script that would be somewhat similar to _____. I think I can do that no problem, but I wanted to ask your permission first since this seems to be YOUR idea. I would not want to seem like I am a copycat and taking everyone else's original ideas. Cassel
Been there, done that, got the same message as well.
Geeeez, is this all she does is go around taking other designers ideas and making them into scripts? I was pretty put off by it when she approached me, but had no clue that it was such a habitual thing with her. Baaah! Now I'm disgusted.
I think her own words sum it up pretty well: "I would not want to seem like I am a copycat and taking everyone else's original ideas."
Ummmm... well then maybe you should come up with YOUR OWN ORIGINAL PRODUCTS and QUIT copying everyone else's, and making some stupid reference to a non-existent "customer who asked" if you could make this script! :(
July 28th - 9:33 am I'm a member of Amanda's forum but it's usually a month behind for downloads & tutorials. Um, I am, too, and I think you get a helluva deal for $50 a year. Out of all the people in digiland who make promises and never live up to them, Amanda is one who delivers. I really don't care if it's a "month behind". Better late than never. And when she falls behind, she always includes huge discounts, coupons, free product. Works for me. --------------------
Only in this community can someone be a MONTH late and it's okay. All sunshine and butterflies cuz it's "Amanda Rockwell's" forum. So you pay for a year and how many months do you actually get? I'll give Amanda this - she has a great marketing strategy. She somehow has convinced the masses that's she's something extraordinary, when it's clear she's not.
Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you. ---------------------------------- SHUT THE FUCK UP MAYA! I've been around this industry as long as you. ------
If you've been around as long as you say, you would know that Maya does not post anonymously.
You may want to read the Designer Agreement you sign when you become a DCR member. It is clearly listed that the forum is private and content is not to be shared publicly.
I'm not going to copy and paste but look under the General section, it's one of the last bullet points.
A tacit agreement at best. No one signs anything. However, as the DCR is not what was promised nor what I agreed to when I 'signed' up, why should I keep my end of the so called agreement?
I am just an average scrapper, not a designer. I am not active on any CT's, although I have been in the past. I am not active in any "scrapbook community", I don't post on the message boards, and I don't post my layouts online anymore. I read the Digi boards for entertainment, and am constantly amazed at what people share on the internet. I freely admit to reading the scrapbook smack blogs, it is a guilty pleasure.
You can email me at: DSTHallofFame@gmail.com
1,657 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 1201 – 1400 of 1657 Newer› Newest»^^^^
The reply I received back from Disney.
Who owns SUN?
She has an entire section of "Disney-Inspired kits"
http://www.lauriesscraps.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=108&products_id=399
Disney's attorneys are going to have a hey-day with her. Shes got a LOT of "disney-inspired" kits.
Snow-white and 7 dwarfs:
http://www.lauriesscraps.com/blog/?p=2162
oops wrong link. here it is:
Snow white & 7 dwarfs
http://www.lauriesscraps.com/store/index.php?main_page=popup_image&pID=369
WOW. Studio MGL is leaving Scrapbookgraphics. Is she leaving to go to Sun? Or is she going to 9th & Bloom? Or somewhere else entirely?
^^^
Isn't she already at SUN?
You frequent a smack blog to gossip and bitch, and I'm a sad fuck. What a bloody hypocrite. I'll be happy when people like you take your talentless arses away from the scrapping community. You cheapen it.
July 23, 2010 1:39 AM
--------
Stop looking in the mirror, maybe you;l surprise yourself.
WOW. Studio MGL is leaving Scrapbookgraphics. Is she leaving to go to Sun? Or is she going to 9th & Bloom? Or somewhere else entirely?
July 23, 2010 10:29 PM
------
big surprise. That's well over 15 designers, I know it's more but can't remember the exact figure, that have left SBG in the last 12 months.
All the Disney stuff is gone. She's not the first to have Disney Inspired stuff. Didn't Saxon Holt have a ton at one stage?
Do they really care? This site has been reported by me and no doubt by someone else 3 months ago and still alive
http://www.rleeroush.net/DisneyDigitalKits.htm
Then, there is shitload of stuuf like that on ebay.
Saxon's kits were not even close to this. Some digital designers borrow color schemes and common shapes which is fine. What you see above is obvious theft.
Wow, all her Disney stuff is gone now. That was fast, unless she reads here and took it down in advance of contact from Disney.
She must read here or was told by someone she was reported because I report Disney stuff on ebay all the time and yet it's still there, rampant as ever. The ones on ebay are items being sold with the actual Disney characters in them.
You can buy things like official Disney embroidery patterns and stuff for your embroidery machines, or official Disney images to use in actual physical products, maybe the Ebay stuff is something like that?
Um....no.
Search for Disney Digital Scrapboooking.
You can still see the "Disney-Inspired" kits (notably, Toy Story) on her blog... at least for now. If she reads here, that will probably come down as well.
I almost feel bad for her, because she says she worked so hard on it, its her favorite kit she's made, and the biggest kit she's made, but geeeesh, common sense, girl! Why would you think its okay to rip off Disney??
That kit is cute and would be fine if she made it herself to scrap her personal photos, but when she sells it, then it becomes piracy.
I honestly think she didn't know. I think maybe someone told her, so she removed them. If I were her, i'd just keep them to scrap my own pics with and redo the kits and leave out the characters.
I'm late on this conversation about tags, but I need to say my bit.
I very strongly object to the objectifying of women. Big, fake boobs and small little waists are not realistic. You only need to do a search for plastic surgery gone wrong to see what happens when we raise our girls to believe they need to look like that to be attractive.
From the replies here (I think they are all the same person) there is a logic ump being made that if people object to those images, they must be objecting to the sexualization of women as a whole, and that they must be jealous.
This is not the case.
What we are objecting to is women furthering the stereotypes that you need to be skinny with big boobs to be sexy. We get enough of that from the media we don't need to do it to each other.
Take the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty as a fantastic example of how to celebrate women without objectifying them.
As for exploring your sexual side via your siggies - I applaud that. However I don't think it belongs in your place of work. Just like if you worked at a retail outlet you wouldn't show up in the S&M getup you wear to the Fetish Night at the club. (unless your work is in the industry of course, which digital scrapbooking is not).
As for being jealous or a prude ... yes, I am fat. But I have the most amazing sex life, complete with a closet full of toys and costumes. My husband and I have a monthly portion of our budget set aside for sex-play. He absolutely love me for my curves. So no, I am not jealous, because I wouldn't want it any other way. Nor am I a prude by any standard.
I don't buy my daughters Barbies, nor do any of my friends. If Barbie were a real human being she would not be able to stand up. I don't want my girls thinking that is beautiful.
Other things that I object to that women regularly did or had done to them to be 'beautiful' include removing a rib from their rib cage to fit a corset and foot binding.
Wow. Check out this video to see how much one "little" copyright infringement can cost you. (easily up to $500,000.00 and more by the time legal fees are included, if you try to steal from someone who decides to pursue you legally)
http://www.shoemoneysystem.com/kicking-legals-ass/
It is long, but very interesting and detailed, and based on someone's multiple experiences with suing over copyright (or trademark) infringement.
note: he does state that in order to go this far legally, you need to have your material officially registered with the copyright office. You also need a good attorney or legal team. (Which, of course, Disney has)
She has a note on her blog that someone left a "mean and pointless" comment about these kits and her copyright infringement. Well, I did it AND it was neither mean nor pointless. I stated the facts - that she was in violation of Walt Disney copyrights and trademarks by selling products with their characters in them. I asked what she would do if someone created a kit with her original art and then said it was "Laurie Scrap's Inspired". I asked how it was that she, as an artist and businesswoman, could find it ok to rip off the art of another artist. I called her a thief. None of this is mean or pointless. It might have offended her soft sensibility - but she will live.
She rambles that I should have contacted her first. Why? Did she bother to contact Disney first to ask if what she was selling was legally approved with them?
She also doesn't think she has created anything with conflict. I would imagine that the Mickey Mouse items - whether in silhouette or not are still trademarks and she has flipping Snow White and the Dwarfs in another kit - but yeah, she hasn't crossed any lines. Oh and other designers told her she was ok. Well then, that just makes everything legal because everyone BUT Disney gives you the nod.
You can buy things like official Disney embroidery patterns and stuff for your embroidery machines, or official Disney images to use in actual physical products, maybe the Ebay stuff is something like that?
_________________________________
the companies that make those patterns have purchased distribution and licensing agreements with Disney. This is not cheap and most small vendors on Ebay probably do not have the funds - because each image is licensed separately.
doesn't Monica of Studio MGL own sunshine studio scraps? I thought she was at least one of the co owners? Maybe that's where she's going.
I refuse to feel sorry for Laurie's Scraps if she's too stupid to know AHEAD OF TIME that what she did was copyright infringement. Seriously, how dumb can one be?
Her CU stuff is crap, too. I liked one of her layered templates and the quality was so poor that I wound up deleting it and putting it on my list of people never to buy from again (like Royanna).
You can buy things like official Disney embroidery patterns and stuff for your embroidery machines, or official Disney images to use in actual physical products, maybe the Ebay stuff is something like that?
You can bet your bippy that those embroidery patterns are for personal use only and not for people to embroider stuff to sell at Etsy. If Disney gets wind they will come after those people too.
big surprise. That's well over 15 designers, I know it's more but can't remember the exact figure, that have left SBG in the last 12 months.
July 24, 2010 4:37 AM
-----------------------------
But yet, exclusivity works? does it work anywhere besides SSD? SSD has a lot more going for it besides exclusivity that makes it so successful.
Think, people.
Speaking of Disney - Wall-E anyone?
http://scrapbookbytes.com/store/digital-scrapbooking-supplies/cap_mrroboto-cprince.html
note: he does state that in order to go this far legally, you need to have your material officially registered with the copyright office. You also need a good attorney or legal team. (Which, of course, Disney has)
July 24, 2010 3:14 PM
-------
Too bad if you live in a country that doesn't have a copyright office.
Other things that I object to that women regularly did or had done to them to be 'beautiful' include removing a rib from their rib cage to fit a corset and foot binding.
July 24, 2010 2:34 PM
-----------
Apparently the rib removal is an urban myth, but I do agree with you wholeheartedly.
oesn't Monica of Studio MGL own sunshine studio scraps? I thought she was at least one of the co owners? Maybe that's where she's going.
July 24, 2010 5:32 PM
------------
I don't think so. It doesn't make sense to own one store and sell at another, does it? I could be wrong though, I frequently am.
But yet, exclusivity works? does it work anywhere besides SSD? SSD has a lot more going for it besides exclusivity that makes it so successful.
------------
It worked for a good long time until about a year ago. This says to me that something else is going on.
Think!
You can bet your bippy that those embroidery patterns are for personal use only and not for people to embroider stuff to sell at Etsy. If Disney gets wind they will come after those people too.
July 24, 2010 8:22 PM
--------------
Exactly! I've bought patterns off Etsy made by the seller and they are not be reproduced in any way, shape or form for resale. I can't see Disney, being a huge corporation, being any different. It's that whole, I bought it, I own it mentality. It's all very well, until something of theirs is stolen and then all hell breaks loose.
She has a note on her blog that someone left a "mean and pointless" comment about these kits and her copyright infringement.
--------------
Wah, wah, wah. She knows she did wrong, which is why she's crying into her apron. When are they going to learn?
Yes, Monica (MGL) owns SUN, and has all along.
Speaking of Disney - Wall-E anyone?
http://scrapbookbytes.com/store/digital-scrapbooking-supplies/cap_mrroboto-cprince.html
July 24, 2010 9:08 PM
----------
Wall-E looks a lot like Number Five from Short Circuit. So Disney is infringing on the creators of Short Circuit.
Yes, Monica (MGL) owns SUN, and has all along.
July 24, 2010 9:41 PM
----------------------
She hasn't owned it all along. Nicole Seitler (who also owns TDC) owned it only a few months ago. I don't know if MGL owns it now, but all along is not true.
Sorry, that kit looks nothing like Wall-e. Absolutely NO infringement there. It's not even close.
http://scrapbookbytes.com/store/digital-scrapbooking-supplies/cap_mrroboto-cprince.html
_______________
Are you kidding?
Wall-E looks a lot like Number Five from Short Circuit.
________
I just watched Short circuit 2 the other day and I was thinking the exact same thing. lol
All I know is that my family and I were watching Wall-E a few night ago, and we had just seen Short Circuit a few week earlier and everyone remarked on the resemblance.
Sorry, that kit looks nothing like Wall-e. Absolutely NO infringement there. It's not even close.
July 24, 2010 10:09 PM
--------
I had to look hard, but there is one Wall-E type robot in the kit.
"I liked one of her layered templates and the quality was so poor that I wound up deleting it and putting it on my list of people never to buy from again (like Royanna)."
How is the quality poor in templates? Can you explain more please? I'm a bit confused because you must have liked the design since you saw the preview and bought it.
http://natalieslittlecorneroftheworld.blogspot.com/
Seriously? She's got actual characters in her stuff - not 'tribute' or 'inspired by' - actual characters.
^^^^
Do you have nothing better to do than surf the web for copyright infringement?
I take intellectual property very seriously. So - no, I don't have anything more important to do right now.
okey dokey
She hasn't owned it all along. Nicole Seitler (who also owns TDC) owned it only a few months ago.
---------
Didn't she sell Sun when she bought DigiChick? If so, that was a long time ago.
Anonymous said...
She has a note on her blog that someone left a "mean and pointless" comment about these kits and her copyright infringement.
--------------
Wah, wah, wah. She knows she did wrong, which is why she's crying into her apron. When are they going to learn?
----------------------------
I left a comment on that post on her blog saying that nobody was mean and she should be grateful she was warned before Disney caught her out but she deleted it of course LOL. Some stupid fool advised her that it was okay to give those disney kits away as "free add ons" and that would be okay then. LOL. Stupid people. I just left her another NOT MEAN message saying she can't give them away free either. That's sure to be deleted too. She "may" have been ill informed before but now I believe she's just plain stupid if she still thinks she's done nothing wrong.
This is from Laurie's blog: Stupid people!
Ana Carol says:
07/24/2010 at 6:05 pm
I can never understand why a person acts like that. We are all just grateful for your work Laurie.
I have no idea about copyright issues, but i can tell you that what i see with other designers is that when something is too obvious its Disney, they offer it free as a add-on to the kit for all to download. That way the person that buy your kit also have all that coordinates so well.
Keep up your fantastic work
:)
Reply
*
Laurie's Scraps says:
07/24/2010 at 6:17 pm
That is a good idea. Maybe I will do that as well. Thank you for the encouraging words instead of the not so nice ones. I appreciate you as well. *hugs*
And above the "new" preview of the kit (she removed the Disney images) she says to look out for "freebies to match the kit soon" so it looks like she's still planning on giving those images away. She's either arrogant or stupid.
I find it extremely funny that Iara is telling another designer what is right and what is wrong in the designers forum at DST.
How is the quality poor in templates? Can you explain more please? I'm a bit confused because you must have liked the design since you saw the preview and bought it.
I liked the preview--fun design. However, when you get the templates open, there are jaggies all over the place. Not good at all.
Oh , the delicious irony of Iara (Baers Garten Designs) talking about
"original inspiration", "making things based on own ideas", said the "creator" of Bracket Templates pirated off of Susan Bartolini.
I think we need to take her designs and give them all away on our own blogs. Change the colors around to make them fit a kit you already have and make them 'free add-ons'. We'll see how she swallows that one.
Seriously, how can people be so stupid? For anyone to think they can just take any trademarked and licensed material and sell it/give it away and claim copyright to it is just plain dumb. I don't care how good you can draw a picture of Mickey Mouse--It's still Mickey Mouse and it's not yours to claim copyright to. Someone send her a link here so she can't delete posts.
So where are the mods? Why even allow people to post for Disney or Barbie "inspired"...and worse yet, yank out those previews. Maybe Disney will find out and close them down. what do the mods do there anyway??
Is anyone else watching this drama between SBG and Cassel play out in the DCR?
If this ... http://shop.scrapbookgraphics.com/PreFABs-Pop-Ups-Fairytales-Edition.html ... is the item in question, I can't believe Maya thought her was innovative for creating them.
These have been on Gunhilde's blog for ages ... with a tutorial on how to create them. What an idiot!
If you can't read the DCR, i'm sure someone here that can will rehash the story for you.
Haha, it was ... that was the product in question.
Maya just confirmed it, lol!
Anonymous said...
How is the quality poor in templates? Can you explain more please? I'm a bit confused because you must have liked the design since you saw the preview and bought it.
I liked the preview--fun design. However, when you get the templates open, there are jaggies all over the place. Not good at all.
July 25, 2010 11:37 AM
She means templates for elements (for instance a layered flower) not a template for a LO! Think before you write!
so for those of us who can't see the DCR, can someone tell us what was said between Cassel & Maya?
Cassel saw something at SBG and decided she wanted to make a script that did that. She asked the designer and the designer said no.
She posted a vague thread in DCR asking if someone can copyright an idea and would it be ok if she did it anyway.
Maya came along and said that Cassel has been doing this to a few of her designers and in this case this idea is super brand new and innovative and no one in the history of the internet has ever done it.
Then someone came along and guessed what product they were talking about, along with posting a link to a tutorial on Gunhild Storeide's blog, which is almost certainly how the designer did it since they match exactly.
Now Maya looks like a dumbass, and Cassel is being touted a hero. Despite the fact that she's apparently going from store to store looking for ideas to turn into scripts rather than having an original idea of her own. Not to mention causing the drama of bringing that thread to the DCR in the first place.
How'd I do?
If you can't read the DCR, i'm sure someone here that can will rehash the story for you.
July 25, 2010 4:33 PM
----
Er, why don't you seeing as you the one who brought it up?
I remember seeing that product at SBG a few days ago and thought, oh, Gunhilde. I can't believe the number of kits that have her stuff in them. It's so lame. Not Gunhilde's stuff, but the fact that so called designers use her stuff to sell, KWIM?
I can't get into the DCR, but that summary is hilarious. Thank you.
I don't get how Cassell turned out to be the hero though, as you said, it sounds like she has nothing original to do.
And her method reminds me of my childrens' when they don't get the answer they want - "Dad said no so let's go try Mom".
Maya came along and said that Cassel has been doing this to a few of her designers and in this case this idea is super brand new and innovative and no one in the history of the internet has ever done it.
------
That is hysterical, because even Gunhilde doing it isn't super brand new. Some people don't get out much, do they?
How'd I do?
July 25, 2010 5:20 PM
LOL.......you did perfect!!
WV= biliest
The product in question isn't even a fantastic product...a novelty maybe for a specialized layout but really how often would you use something like that?
Although I don't think Cassel was right, she shouldn't have been trying to make money off of someone else's idea .. I think it's hilarious that Maya thought it was so "innovative and never been done in digi before". Bad thing is other designers at that site were defending their fellow designer thinking it was her original idea when it so obviously wasn't. Too bad all the SBG kiss asses that shop there can't read the DCR and see what a fool Maya made of herself.
Can't you just imagine it ... there she is, thinking she had found a designer that had came up with a wonderful technique that she was going to make a ton of money off of ... only to find out that it was ripped off from a freebie blog. I'm rolling, so freaking funny!!!
I thought the product in question was hideous. Cassel is a hero because the thread is mostly full of Cassel fans.
Bad thing is other designers at that site were defending their fellow designer thinking it was her original idea when it so obviously wasn't.
---------------
And right there is the problem. People either accusing or defending without knowing all the facts.
I'm just wondering if the SBG designer was asked and said it was her own idea.
Cassel doesn't look like a hero. Maya slandered her left right and center and then got really mad when the mods edited it out. Maya was the one who said all Cassel does is look for other people's things to copy - and now it's being stated here on this blog as fact. So Maya did her own damage.
I think it's sweet how Maya comes out of this with pie all over her face. So much for this brilliant innovative new designer she is so proud of.
wv: pheth - the noise you make when you stick out your tongue and blow hard at the person who just made a fool of herself.
Cassel is just a drama queen in addicted to be the center of attention. Maya wrote something but her posts got edited by a mod. Guess who's a mod at DST? Cassel.
Linda was the one that edited Maya's posts, NOT Cassel.
You saying that just makes you sound like Maya. Your jumping to conclusions and smearing somebodies name in the process to win a point in an argument.
I still don't believe Cassel is making money. Her stuff is N.A.S.T.Y
It is the most awful stuff I have ever seen online. Why are we making such a big deal over this?
It's about professionalism.
It has nothing to do with whether or not you or anyone else thinks Cassel's stuff is good or bad.
It is the most awful stuff I have ever seen online.
-------
I'm not fan, but you must not get out much. There is much, much worse out there.
It has nothing to do with Cassel's stuff and whether anyone likes it or not. It's about a cocky shop owner who thinks she invented digiscrapping. At least that's the vibe I got from her snarky comments. No one's defending Cassel, but Maya was way out of line. She said some nasty things about Cassel that were uncalled for, because she "thought" one of her designers invented something that she would greatly profit off of. This just goes to prove that everything that's been stated about Maya on this blog, is true. She's a snarky, snotty bitch in my opinion. I just hope she doesn't treat her customers like that. I'm sure she doesn't, she's probably over sugarly sweet to them. Most people like her are. Not to mention the snotty replies by her designers. They are all getting a little too egotistical for me. I am writing SBG off my list for places to shop forever.
On a side note, i'm not defending Cassel in any way. I flat out don't like her and never have. From all the stuff i've read that she's been posting in the DCR, she's been accused of this before, stealing others ideas and coding. I recall reading another thread a while back where someone outside of digiworld called her out for the same thing. Makes you wonder.
But regardless, digi is no different than any other industry. One designer can make something and if another designer chooses to, they can make something similar. You can't copyright an idea. If Cassel had just released her script instead of asking the designer (who's a freaking template designer at that .. we so need more of those, lol), none of this drama would have even happened.
Linda was the one that edited Maya's posts, NOT Cassel.
You saying that just makes you sound like Maya. Your jumping to conclusions and smearing somebodies name in the process to win a point in an argument.
July 25, 2010 10:50 PM
-----
Hey chill out!
I wasn't trying to defend Maya and I didn't know that Linda, whoever that is, was the mod who edited her. I just thought it's quite suspicious that Cassel is a mod at DST. She could have been the one to edit posts in her favor. Who the hell gave her that much power at DST anyway? That's the biggest joke ever.
She volunteered. Nuff said.
She means templates for elements (for instance a layered flower) not a template for a LO! Think before you write!
Agreed. I wonder if she means the layered paper templates? I downloaded some when she had them as freebies on her blog. They look good at thumbnail size, but when you get them at 100% they're full of jaggies. MAde me think she doesn't know how to recolor items. I'm betting the quality on her kit items (copyright infringement or not) isn't any better.
WV: inepts :)
You're right, cassell's stuff isn't that good. I'll give her credit for being able to actually create scripts but her ego is far bigger than her talent.
Grannyart is nothing but rendered poser stuff. She sure does have A LOT of it, though, doesn't she? Not to say that she hasn't spent hundreds of dollars and doesn't mind just giving it away but it does make you wonder. You can't be absolutely sure that other designers are using her stuff,though when the models can be purchased and rendered by anyone. DAZ 3D is free. Personally, I'm sick of seeing poser crap in kits. It's like the whole acrylic phase--it was neat at first and now it's just annoying because it's everywhere.
There once was a designer who was an action maker who wound up accusing half the digital designers of copyright violations but after the fact many found out it was all a bunch of horse pucky. Now it's not hard to copy an action, you just have to know how to do it but if you are stupid enough not to make your own actions in the first place.......
I'm not defending Cassel either, other then the fact that at least she tried to do what was right and ask the designer of course not knowing that when it came down to it the designer had copied someone else's work. You can be sure that Maya won't be back to explain her designer's explanation. Just make sure you check the store to see that designer gone.
Her designers who weighed in didn't come back to say anything else either. LOL they had egg all over their face.
As far as going from store to store all one has to do is look in a product gallery to get an idea of what's out there, has been out, and half of it being called copyright infringement is just plain ignorant. Why people come here with site links and then don't know what they are looking at, or whether a person might have permission to use items is just dumb. But there are a lot of dumb people in this business and I just wish to hell they'd go away!!
I'm not defending Cassel either, other then the fact that at least she tried to do what was right and ask the designer of course not knowing that when it came down to it the designer had copied someone else's work
________________________________
See why being original is so important? The next time you (generally speaking) want to copy or be "inspired" by something, stop and think whether that person was "inspired" by someone before that. Even Gunhild--what's her name--with the 'original' one copied the idea from a greeting card.
Personally, I'm sick of seeing poser crap in kits. It's like the whole acrylic phase--it was neat at first and now it's just annoying because it's everywhere.
__________________________________
This is so true. There's a ton of poser stuff out there that people think is original art. Just look at Joelle - at lot of her backgrounds and elements are poser and DAZ.
I don't mean to rehash the Disney thing, but I was reading the ISO thread regarding Disney kits..
http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/2533379-post90.html
She says anything Disney related, even the mouse ears are a no-no but yet she has the ears in her signature. LOL I just thought it was kind of funny.
The difference is she isn't selling it or redistributing it in any way.
OMG did Day ever throw pie at Maya with this link to a tut for a 'familiar' logo:
http://www.adobetutorialz.com/articles/2810/1/Graphic-Design-Studio-Web-Layout/4
I wonder if that whole site will get off it's collective high horse now?
What's up with Sugar HillCo? Does MissTiina thinks she can cover her shit opening another store?
http://www.adobetutorialz.com/articles/2810/1/Graphic-Design-Studio-Web-Layout/4
_______________________
LOL!
Uhmmmm, there's a difference between a bullseye/target symbol and an "at" or @ symbol with an extra ring.
Nice stretch Day and company, LOL!
She didn't say it was exact, she said it was similar - and it is. If you can't see that, go check your eyes. Or your denial meter.
I just wanted to make a comment about this whole Cassel and Maya conversation. Though I will say I don't use scripts nor use the program they are made for. The issue here I really think is that a designer Cassel went directly to the designer in question out of respect. Since it appears that Cassel realized that this idea has been around for years and years, she was not happy with her answer from the designer. I like the idea that she brought it to the forum for some feedback. What I don't like is that a campaign was started I am sure by Maya for all the store designers to go into the forum and say how unprofessional this way. Oh come on ladies - stop acting like children. And then Maya deleting her posts as someone censored her comments. Again childlike. Maya as usual likes to bully her way through something that really she has no business doing. She calls them her designers - what she owns people. The designer in question I am sure is an adult that can take care of herself and doesn't need Maya's help nor every single designer on the site defending her. The designer in question didn't even respond. I just wish Maya would keep her nose out of other people business - She seems to think she invented digital designing and owns the rights to just about anything that is designed by anyone, not limited to just product. Colors and shapes or anything that is digitally made. I don't understand why she thinks she is god like person. She made an ass out of herself which she normally does. You all have talked on why she goes through designers - well it is obvious to some people and designers why. She is not a nice person and there are a handful of designers that stay for reasons I cant explain. I could never work for a person that is truly into herself as much as Maya is. She probably wakes up in the morning and has a party at the mirror saying I love me, I am the best, I am not a bitch, on and on.
I say rock on to all the designers that aren't afraid to go face to face with each other. I also say that is you have a good idea, love a shape or color design. Trust me most of what is put out these days is nothing more that inspiration from somewhere. Nothing is really new these days.
If you're a designer and you make something, even if not an original idea, would you want a script/action maker coming along asking your permission to make such an action or script of your item to redistribute as a commercial-use item? Why would you say yes? I can't imagine why she would've even asked in the first place. She obviously wanted attention because anyone with half a brain knows you can't copyright an idea. Unless she really is stupid and actually didn't know that.
Cassell should have just shut the hell up and made it because absolutely NO permission was needed. Nothing needed to be discussed anywhere publicly about this because it wasn't anything worth bitching about. Apparently, all both of them (Maya and cassell) did was make themselves look like morons.
It really pays to be smart, keep to yourself, worry only about yourself and keep your god-damned nose out of everyone else's business. Not something too many designers do today.
"Welcome to the world of women, drama and digiscrapbooking. It's almost as good as watching the Real Housewives of New York City." Or New Jersey...are we in for a little "table flipping" OHHH, I hope so, don't want to miss that.
"Welcome to the world of women, drama and digiscrapbooking. It's almost as good as watching the Real Housewives of New York City." Or New Jersey...are we in for a little "table flipping" OHHH, I hope so, don't want to miss that.
^^^^^
If there was a way to flip tables over the internet, Maya or one of her designers would have invented this new and innovative idea and no one else would be able to do it ;)
I didn't read the forum thread in question. But someone mod edited what Maya wrote? Did they at least put "removed for breaking some rule" or just cut out parts of what was posted? That just seems wrong. According to someone on here it was Linda who did it and not Cassel. How fishy. I don't want any moderators "editing" my posts and potentially changing what I had originally written. Twist a few things around, remove a word here or there, and the meaning is different.
It's downright amazing the amount of free stuff that designers are using in their kits and reselling for profit. I see Granny Art in almost 1/3 of them.
For the scrappers on here who want some free stuff - visit her blog.
http://grannyart.blogspot.com/
I was just noticing that and being annoyed by it. There is a designer at Enchanted Studio Scraps who is selling stuff from granny art for CU. Not changing it in the slightest or even putting it in a pack with other stuff. I had to do a double take on it, but sure enough, there it is!
She didn't say it was exact, she said it was similar - and it is. If you can't see that, go check your eyes. Or your denial meter.
July 26, 2010 11:14 AM
Oh bullshit, the bulls-eye and the @ symbols are two entirely different symbols. Better check your Intelligence Meter.
WV= gushera
The quoted post was a gusher-o'bullshit.
I don't mean to rehash the Disney thing, but I was reading the ISO thread regarding Disney kits..
http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/2533379-post90.html
She says anything Disney related, even the mouse ears are a no-no but yet she has the ears in her signature. LOL I just thought it was kind of funny.
-------------------------
sorry but Im just reading up too after being away for a while. What a disgrace. She removed all the Disney stuff I guess now..
This..http://www.lauriesscraps.com/blog/?p=2162
has the TOONTOWN name, which is owned by Disney. Now, I may be wrong but my kids play this game online at http://toontown.go.com/ almost weekly so it stuck out to me easily. Still, I think it's wrong...for sale or not. So is she now just giving away the pieces in question to avoid copywrite? Wow, I love it when people find a way to justify their own stupidity and stealing.
Here's an idea Laurie - get a real and original idea! She's just another nobody designer looking to rip off anyone to make a buck. Total shit.
Toontown is one of the attractions at the Disney parks, which the game is based on. The name Toontown is as trademarked as the name Disney and all its characters.
I didn't read the forum thread in question. But someone mod edited what Maya wrote? Did they at least put "removed for breaking some rule" or just cut out parts of what was posted? That just seems wrong. According to someone on here it was Linda who did it and not Cassel. How fishy. I don't want any moderators "editing" my posts and potentially changing what I had originally written. Twist a few things around, remove a word here or there, and the meaning is different.
July 26, 2010 1:11 PM
------------
That's exactly what happened. So, how come Linda edited Maya's post and no one else's? And what was the rule broken? I wasn't aware that we were not allowed to share our opinions and if they are not on the majority's side, we were going to be censored. DST is lame and full of bullshit.
Editing someone's post by removing words is much worse than just deleting their post. What right does a DST moderator have in changing/removing/editing someone's post. I understand when someone writes I hate XYZ store and then the moderator used to put something like I hate REMOVED BY MOD store. At least it's obvious it was changed. The DST mods are on a power trip.
My understanding was the mod removed the part that was a personal attack. Maya went a bit off the handle about Cassel not having ideas, trolling around for ideas to steal, 'jumping on the bandwagon' etc.
The mod was obviously flustered by it, because she gave Maya the reason that it twas opinion not fact ... when what she was really doing was editing out the personal attack.
I actually kinda wish the personal attack was still there so everyone who hadn't read it yet could see what an arrogant sanctimonious bitch she was.
Anonymous said...
My understanding was the mod removed the part that was a personal attack. Maya went a bit off the handle about Cassel not having ideas, trolling around for ideas to steal, 'jumping on the bandwagon' etc.
The mod was obviously flustered by it, because she gave Maya the reason that it twas opinion not fact ... when what she was really doing was editing out the personal attack.
I actually kinda wish the personal attack was still there so everyone who hadn't read it yet could see what an arrogant sanctimonious bitch she was.
July 26, 2010 5:35 PM
-----------------------------------
Exactly !
Wow. You really hate, Maya. I get that and I don't care. However, editing someone's post without stating in the post is not right. Writing it later in a different post, oh by the way, I edited your post, is not okay. Would Linda have done that for anyone being attacked or just Cassel or another DST mod. I hate power trips and censorship.
That's exactly what happened. So, how come Linda edited Maya's post and no one else's? And what was the rule broken? I wasn't aware that we were not allowed to share our opinions and if they are not on the majority's side, we were going to be censored. DST is lame and full of bullshit.
July 26, 2010 5:13 PM
-------
Mods have always been able to edit posts, why the fuss about it now?
Wow. You really hate, Maya. I get that and I don't care. However, editing someone's post without stating in the post is not right. Writing it later in a different post, oh by the way, I edited your post, is not okay. Would Linda have done that for anyone being attacked or just Cassel or another DST mod. I hate power trips and censorship.
July 26, 2010 5:40 PM
-------
Of for fuck's sake, posts have been edited before in heated discussions when it has come to personal attacks. This is not the first time. It may be the first time some of you have noticed, but it's not the first time it's happened.
Whenever a mod has edited a post before, it's right there in the post, reason for edit.
I don't want any moderators "editing" my posts and potentially changing what I had originally written. Twist a few things around, remove a word here or there, and the meaning is different.
July 26, 2010 1:11 PM
----------
OMG, seriously? How egotistical or paranoid are you? Do you honestly think the mods have nothing better to do than troll the forums and change posts?
Best laugh I've had all day
Yes.
If you're so paranoid about it, stay out of stupid arguments and you won't have to worry about being censored. Or start your own forum, get it good and popular and then don't moderate it.
I don't really hate Maya. I do think her behavior in that thread tells a lot about her though and it would be great for that not to have been wiped from history.
As for the partial editing - no one re-arranged words it was just a removal of the personal attack. It does happen all the time.
I don't really hate Maya. I do think her behavior in that thread tells a lot about her though and it would be great for that not to have been wiped from history.
-------------
Agreed.
She deleted her posts because she is a spoiled brat who got proven wrong.
It's about time she woke up and realized that she and SBG are not the be all and end all of digi scrapping.
There are better stores, and much better designers out there, than the ones at SBG.
http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/new-digital-products-33/new-twilight-kit-my-jake-angelle-design-248780/
She deleted her posts because she is a spoiled brat who got proven wrong.
------------
And it's not the first time either. In the whole bracket shape debacle, she kept insisting that her designer had not stolen the template, when in fact, it turned out that the designer had stolen it.
And before anyone goes on about the whole you can't copyright a shape, that wasn't the point.
http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/new-digital-products-33/new-twilight-kit-my-jake-angelle-design-248780/
^^^^^^
Was there a reason you posted this?? Is there something i'm missing?
http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/new-digital-products-33/new-twilight-kit-my-jake-angelle-design-248780/
----------
what's your point?
http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/new-digital-products-33/new-twilight-kit-my-jake-angelle-design-248780/
----------
LMAO at the word art: I am a Wolf Lover.
^^^^
At least it's correct.
Still not getting the whole Twilight mania by grown women though.
Yeah, me either. Are the guys supposed to be hot or something? Guess I like my men more manlier and less teenage-boyish. lol
Me three! The whole Twilight vampire thing disgusts me and I prefer MEN who don't wear make up.
I just don't get it because there are better vampire books out there and better vampire movies.
I prefer MEN who don't wear make up.
July 26, 2010 10:54 PM
----------
Capitalization of men for a reason? Women wearing make up is no better really. It's all about sex, not matte which way you look at it.
Check out this video. I guess Disney really is out looking for infringement and won't stop at even a family on food stamps. Personally, I would NEVER even think of producing anything Disney related. To me it's like stealing the inspiration from another designer (which it really is..) and not original. I have a hard time understanding why laurie would try to justify giving away the pieces she removed (since that is still distributing). Do you think she could still be liable for what she did profit on the Disney related items?
http://www.wftv.com/video/16824445/index.html
There's a local business who uses disney characters here as a way to attract customers, too. I'm not sure if they advertise them or not. Whether you're stealing from a large company like Disney or a newbie nobody designer, stealing is stealing. However, common sense dictates if you're going to be an idiot and steal ideas anyway, do it from a newbie nobody designer who doesn't have millions of dollars and a huge legal defense team on retainer to come after you. LOL
Capitalization of men for a reason? Women wearing make up is no better really. It's all about sex, not matte which way you look at it.
MEN as in adults, not teenage boys.
Check out this video. I guess Disney really is out looking for infringement and won't stop at even a family on food stamps. Personally, I would NEVER even think of producing anything Disney related. To me it's like stealing the inspiration from another designer (which it really is..) and not original. I have a hard time understanding why laurie would try to justify giving away the pieces she removed (since that is still distributing). Do you think she could still be liable for what she did profit on the Disney related items?
http://www.wftv.com/video/16824445/index.html
-------------------------
There has to be more to that news story than what they are saying. What about all the businesses that rent or sell costumes or the businesses that provide characters for children's parties? Why do they get away with it? I doubt each and every party character business has gotten permission from Disney.
(Google 'characters for children's parties' and you'll find tons of businesses using Disney character costumes.)
What about all the businesses that rent or sell costumes or the businesses that provide characters for children's parties?
------------------------
Unless they have a license from Disney to sell them, they're breaking the law. Nothing more to that very simple fact or to that story.
Just like digiscrapers can't take images and sell Disney-themed kits with them, costume designers can't just make costumes and sell them. Card makers can't make cards with them. Clothing designers can't make clothes with them, so on, blah, blah, blah. Meet all the requirements of Disney's licensing application, including the bucks to pay their royalty fees and you can. Obviously, there are legitimate companies that do.
Yeah, me either. Are the guys supposed to be hot or something? Guess I like my men more manlier and less teenage-boyish. lol
WHAT??? No pasty teenager with a UNI brow for you?? LOL. They could not make him cute no matter how much makeup they use on him..EWWW
What I find to be hillarious in the whole debaucle is that Baers Garten is in there talking about not stealing other designers' ideas.
Iara (Baers Garten) said: "There was no original inspiration to create the script, the whole thing is based on someone's else product and idea."
So, it's not okay to use someone else's IDEA, but it's perfectly okay to purchase another designer's product, and use it as an actual template for making her own bracket-album to sell (bracket-album saga with ScrapKitchen at SSD, in which is was clearly proven that Iara used ScrapKitchen's product as a template, because ScrapKitchen's micro-watermark was present in Iara's "new" product!), but it's not okay to use an IDEA. Wow. Pretty clear ethics there. *shakes head*
And back then, Maya came on babbling about how it was a completely innocent mistake of an inexperienced designer. Apparently "ethics" are very different if you are a designer at SBG, and you are allowed to do such things, but no one else better try it. :O
n which is was clearly proven that Iara used ScrapKitchen's product as a template, because ScrapKitchen's micro-watermark was present in Iara's "new" product!)
-----------
It was not only proven, in the end, Iara finally admitted to using the shape.
Don't you all just love how Maya applies such a blatant double standard to the industry? Her clearly superior designer will be defended while other people will be vilified.
I'm so glad I am an outsider to all that crap...I wouldn't sell in that store if she paid ME a commission to sell there. Hell, from everything I read here, I don't want to design anything anywhere..what a joke the whole thing is. LOL
This Maya chick sounds like a real piece of work.
For those of you who are just dying to see what Maya posted, here it is, in its unedited glory ...........
I have been trying to avoid chiming in here because Cassel shared her version of the story without mentioning the designer in question and I didn't really think I wanted to draw more attention to it than it deserved. However, she also dragged me into it by private messaging me since it was a designer in my store that she is dealing with.
Since we do not have anything at all to hide here I have no problem with stepping up to try and clarify the situation from the other side as the way the story was presented left a lot of room for speculation with regard to the type of product here. This was not a simple frame with a word on it. As Cassel later stated, this is a product that is entirely new to digital. It is certainly something one can accomplish with paper but in over 7 years of digital scrapbooking this product is actually an original idea to our craft, and HATS OFF to the designer who was smart enough, creative enough and technically apt enough to pull it off on her own. That isn't an easy thing to accomplish in this over-saturated market, but she did it.
It is a new release and there is a lot of expansion room for the product and our designer has every intention of making the most of her idea with further products of the same nature.
Some days ago Cassel emailed her because she had seen our designers design and wanted to create a script that would replicate the technique to sell to her customers. Since our designer is actually new and interning with me, she came to our group of designers to ask what she should do. Everyone advised her to tell Cassel that she could not condone this, that it was her idea and technique and that it would affect her sales negatively if Cassel were to make a script to provide to others. We actually expected that the conversation would end there, but to our surprise we found it continued on here. Regardless of whether or not the designer or her product were mentioned by Cassel in the original post, clearly Cassel still has issues regarding her response to come here in search of support, and to justify her desire to usel someone else's idea.
Our designers have responded here because they are privy to the entire story. This is a clear cut situation in our books and it is not the first time that Cassel has contacted one of our designers asking to make a product from their designs or ideas in a way that would directly and negatively impact their sales. She always approaches with the line that a customer has asked her to make this product and has even stated that she doesn't want to be viewed as a copycat which is why she wants to work WITH our designers rather than simply going ahead and doing it with them being unaware.
I made the mistake of assuming that her contact was asking permission, but when I called Cassel on her refusal to accept the decline for permission, she made a point of telling me that she never actually asked for it. Apparently what she asked for was for the designer to work with her, but she certainly never offered any sharing of profits.
The fact here is simple. She is trying to capitalize on someone else's idea and design and it would seem as though that this is generally the nature of her business. To use the excuse that a million people will eventually have stolen the idea and made products out of it on their own is a lame way of avoiding one's conscience on the matter. What she is doing is wrong and it can not be justified by the fact that if she doesn't do it first, then everyone else will beat her to it.
Further, to step up here and tell us she is doing us a favor by postponing or delaying her product release out of respect for our designer, is ridiculous. There is no doubt that if Cassel releases this product that our designer's sales will drop off immediately, especially when the designers get their hands on the product as a CU release and anyone and everyone can pull this technique off with a click of the mouse. So we are relieved that she is at least seeing the light for the time being, but I would far from call it respectful.
Respectful would be to stop looking at the products of others and see how you can steal it to capitalize for yourself. Just as this idea is something that she thinks anyone could have thought of, I challenge her to come up with her own ideas instead.
In answer to the sideline question regarding originality. I just want to say that in no way would we all be involved in this situation if the question of originality wasn't so clear. There is nothing else in digiland like this product. Currently the only place you can go to buy it is Scrapbookgraphics. If you don't have the skill level (or time) to pull off this technique by yourself, then you need to visit our store to purchase the product to do so.
Cassel knows all this. She has not already simultaneously created a similar product on her own. She has found the product herself and is aiming to replicate it and like I said before this is not the first SBG designers she has contacted to do this to and I am sure that SBG is not the only store she deals with either. Will others eventually take the idea and sell it themselves, most probably so and no doubt Cassel will eventually jump on the bandwagon and feel justified in doing so. However, until then this is simple clear cut case of right and wrong. It is copying someone else's idea. Whether or not we are protected legally is besides the point (and a joke rather because the legal systems carry very little weight over the internet and cross-countries) but this is a matter of conscience. Follow the golden rule!
Again I want to commend my intern designer for coming up with an original and creative idea (in fact, she has come up with two already) in an industry that is so saturated. I am sure my fellow designers and creatives here can relate to the heartfelt disappointment she is meeting for the first time when confronted by this issue.
Maya
There is nothing else in digiland like this product. Currently the only place you can go to buy it is Scrapbookgraphics...
However, until then this is simple clear cut case of right and wrong. It is copying someone else's idea. Whether or not we are protected legally is besides the point (and a joke rather because the legal systems carry very little weight over the internet and cross-countries) but this is a matter of conscience. Follow the golden rule!
LMAO!!!! Maya, you really should get a CLUE before you go spouting off about the "originality" of the product and saying that NO ONE has made a digital product like this before. OMG, I couldn't write this comedy script any better if I tried!
See Gunhild's website when she made this exact type of product, with a tutorial that "your" designer probably followed, and it was posted at least 7 MONTHS ago, which is when Gunhild uploaded the product at 4shared.
http://www.4shared.com/get/TFzEwzst/Christmas_pop-ups.html
So who is the designer who copied, Maya? Guess "your" girl is not so amazingly original after all.
This is funny shit!! LMAO!
Maya got all up in arms about baersgarten being accused of piracy and was proven wrong on that one too. You'd think she'd have conversations with her designers BEFORE she goes spouting off. I wonder if she'll come back with a lame story like she did with Lara or if she is hoping this dies a quiet death and gets bumped out of the main page of DCR..
Having said that, I think Cassel is a hack. Maya is correct with her assessment of Cassel--no originality and no respect.
Why all the Cassel hate? I've never bought her stuff so I'm not a 'fan' ...I'm ambivalent ... just curious.
^^^^ Ummm maybe because she comes across as a busy-body know-it-all who has to have her nose in everyones business, tell everyone how to do things, and always has the correct opinion on everything? Just one example: her thread in the DCR where she scolded designers for sending e-mail ads that had "too many" images or were over a certain size. Of course we should all conform to her standards. *rolls eyes*
She should never have been accepted as a moderator at DST; now it's only gotten worse.
Since our designer is actually new and interning with me, she came to our group of designers to ask what she should do. Everyone advised her to tell Cassel that she could not condone this, that it was her idea and technique and that it would affect her sales negatively if Cassel were to make a script to provide to others.
------
Now if this happened, right at that moment the designer in question had the opportunity to say, actually, no, it wasn't my original idea, I followed a tutorial. But it's evident that she did not say anything such thing, which makes her even more of a hack than Cassel. At least Cassel owned up to what she does.
She should never have been accepted as a moderator at DST; now it's only gotten worse.
July 28, 2010 1:21 AM
-----
Yeah, well, maybe there weren't so many volunteers and the site won't run itself.
Anonymous said...
big surprise. That's well over 15 designers, I know it's more but can't remember the exact figure, that have left SBG in the last 12 months.
July 24, 2010 4:37 AM
You can add Soval to that list too
^^^^
Yep, I saw that. And yet so many here over the last months keep insisting that there's nothing going on over there. Fer sure!
Again I want to commend my intern designer for coming up with an original and creative idea (in fact, she has come up with two already) in an industry that is so saturated. I am sure my fellow designers and creatives here can relate to the heartfelt disappointment she is meeting for the first time when confronted by this issue.
Maya
July 27, 2010 11:50 PM
----------------------------------
So what is the other original and creative idea ? I've been through Studio Dutchie's store and I can't see it !
Templates, obviously! No one else is doing them!
I wonder if Maya is referring to the "book illusions" series, which, again, has been done before and is neither innovative nor creative with this particular designer.
Seriously, what did you expect from a store that come up with "Creative Fusion" and tried to present it like it's never been done before?
psst - word on the street
ScrapArtist is closing early next month.
I hope the subscriptions for Inside the Scrapartist Studio are honored by Amanda Rockwell.
Templates, obviously! No one else is doing them!
.......................
Oh no, you're mistaken..they're not templates they're PreFABs! Don't you know if you give a product a different name it becomes an original and inovative idea!
psst - word on the street
ScrapArtist is closing early next month.
I hope the subscriptions for Inside the Scrapartist Studio are honored by Amanda Rockwell.
----------------------------
GET OUT! How do you know? Any reason they are giving up?
innovative ^^^ (before the spelling police come after me)
psst - word on the street
ScrapArtist is closing early next month.
I hope the subscriptions for Inside the Scrapartist Studio are honored by Amanda Rockwell.
----------------------------
GET OUT! How do you know? Any reason they are giving up?
....................
tired I guess - same ol sh**, diff day.
I haven't ventured there much since they started doing the altered art stuff..
I'm a member of Amanda's forum but it's usually a month behind for downloads & tutorials.
Who owns SUN?
July 23, 2010 6:07 PM
........................
Is it Amanda Kay?
I need to make some of those stupid things and put them up as a blog freebie. I think everyone needs to, to knock that woman's ego down a few hundred notches.
DO IT!
I just love it. You bash DST and say you never go there but obviously enough Designers are signed up in the DCR and run right over here to tell everyone else what's going on.
Why then did you ever sign the agreement for the DCR. If you come here and tell what you shouldn't be telling aren't you just as dishonest and immoral as someone who pirates, copies and does all of the other stuff one knows they shouldn't do and you slam them for. Obviously there are those who need to look at their own motives for what they say and what they do before they slam others. Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you.
I'm a member of Amanda's forum but it's usually a month behind for downloads & tutorials.
Um, I am, too, and I think you get a helluva deal for $50 a year. Out of all the people in digiland who make promises and never live up to them, Amanda is one who delivers. I really don't care if it's a "month behind". Better late than never. And when she falls behind, she always includes huge discounts, coupons, free product. Works for me.
http://www.photoshoproadmap.com/Photoshop-blog/2009/06/22/a-nice-popup-papercraft-text-effect/
_____________________
Yes, what an ORIGINAL idea! Never been done before in ALL of digital design! /sarcasm
Oh, my god. Some people just need to get a clue.
Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you.
__________________________________
You must be Maya? Pathetic is the word I would use to describe the shit that goes on in the backroom. Why keep it secret? Perhaps because of what it really is ... a place to bash each other or to sell CU.
I'm not the one who exposed this Cassel/Maya/Dutchie debacle but I have no problem with those that did. Scrapbooking stores are no holier or better than any other business in the marketplace. All businesses and their practices should be as transparent as possible so that customers can make informed choices regarding where they want to spend their hard earned dollars.
How dishonest is it for a customer to be led to believe that they would be buying a new and innovative product never before seen in digiland, created by a up and coming hot new designer named Dutchie. Spending hard earned money on this new product. When, come to find out, this Dutchie clearly used a free tutorial and perhaps the free template itself. I know I'd feel ripped off.
People have a RIGHT to know about this type of dishonesty.
Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you.
______________
Pathetic is the only word I can think of to describe the utter bullshit that goes on in this industry. So get off your high horse and go back to your pathetic little "designer resource" world. Most digi designers today couldn't even follow some of the tutorials offered out there, never mind actually CREATE something from scratch. There are actually REAL digital artists out there in the world and about 99.9 percent of them exist outside the digital scrapbooking arena. Digiscrap designers are nothing but wannabes and they're so goddamn catty and jealous, they won't hesitate in looking like an idiot to protect an idea that was taken from someone else in the first place, so STFU.
Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you.
----------------------------------
SHUT THE FUCK UP MAYA!
I've been around this industry as long as you. What, you think you've been around much longer than anyone else and that makes you the queen of digi-shit? I have news for you - those of us that are old timers much like yourself have never thought much of your shit attitude..and trust me it really stinks. You never tried to fit in with any of us, are always starting some dramatic shit (yes, even years ago) and never represented this community in any kind of positive way. In fact you always thought you were better. So, news flash bitch..you have always been and will be an indecent, immoral bitch. That stick jammed up your ass is so far up there that it must be the only thing keeping your back straight. I'll speak for most of the design community - WE DONT NEED YOU. DONT WANT YOU AND DONT NEED THE LIKES OF YOU REPRESENTING US. YOU MAKE US ALL LOOK LIKE FOOLS, BRINGING CONSTANT DRAMA TO OUR LITTLE CORNER OF THE WORLD. PLEASE...PLEASE..TAKE YOUR SUB-PAR DESIGNS AND TEAM AND LEAVE. YOU HAVE EMBARASSED THIS COMMUNITY FOR WAY TO LONG.
This has been a long time coming for me and probably most of the community of hard working designers. I've bit my tongue for far to long. Now please..get out!
Maya sure did make an asshole of herself this time. I still can't believe the arrogance of her comments....what a biotch!!
It is really to bad that her comments are not there for posterity...
dayummmmm .... take a chilld pill. You're gonna give yourself an aneurysm.
I may not be a huge Maya fan, but I admire her spirit to go balls to the walls for her designer. Sucks for her that the designer was trying to pass off her stuff as original. Yup, some major egg on the face there.
Cassel is ALWAYS trying to rip off other designer's and approaching them to make scripts.
She should do her own internet surfing to rip off ideas instead of designer's who've already done it.
Lazy thief! No cookie.
If she hasn't approached you to rip off one of your ideas for a "client who asked her to make a script for it" .. you're either A) in the minority or B) not worthy of her scripting theft.
but I admire her spirit to go balls to the walls for her designer.
_________________
You're kidding, right? Not only was she way over the top (not to mention, completely incorrect) with her defense of said designer, she made herself and the designer look like fools. She doesn't own "her" designers. They don't need defending. This is business, not a hen house, so please stop behaving like a bunch of cackling old chickens.
1. Designers and store owners, take some business 101 classes. A.S.A.P.
2. Design your own stuff, run your own store and stop worrying about what everyone else is doing.
3. Cassel should not be asking permission in the first place to create a new product from the idea of an existing item. You don't have to be nice, you don't have to play fair.
4. Designers being asked are even more stupid then Cassel for asking if they say yes. Why the hell would you?
5. Designers--if you are faced with this question, say no and be done with it. Don't go asking for advice or get all wishy-washy "OMG, what do I do" with it. Just say NO or, even better, just ignore the request. Your response is moot, anyway. Or should be.
6. Store owners--just mind your own fucking business. If you are so egotistical that you can't let the parties in question handle it themselves, at least keep it between you and the parties involved. PLEASE don't drag it into such a drama magnet like the DCR. If you must do such a thing, don't cry when you come out looking like a fool and everyone talks about how much of a frothing, rabid rat you are in a place like this.
^^^
From what it sounds like though, Cassel didn't know it was an already existing blog freebie. She thought it was original too. That's what I'm saying. She's too lazy to go thief from the net, just from other designer's who've already done it.
The way I see it, Maya was trying to stand behind a newbie designer. But, she got burned. Big time.
Is Dutchie still selling @ SBG? Have they removed said product? From what I understand of CU you can use GH's stuff as long as you credit her in the TOU. Did she do that?
Cassel didn't know it was an already existing blog freebie. She thought it was original too.
___________
So what? What if it actually was? Take a look around...PS styles (especially wood, acrylic, glass, etc), novelty flair buttons, textured papers, layout templates, extracted bows, actions galore to create everything from the stunning to the stupid. I could go on and on and on and on.
(sorry...Word verification I just had to share: Wowee. As in Wowee, people sure are stupid.
What exactly are you trying to say here? I don't get your point.
"So what if Cassel didn't know? Take a look around at styles, etc .."
I don't understand what you're trying to enlighten me on?
So Cassel didn't know Dutchie didn't come up with something original and take a look around??
Ok, I looked. Still don't get your point.
If you're going to quote me, quote me correctly.
I didn't quite get your point of whether or not cassel thought it was an original product in the first place. As in, so what if it actually was an original product?
YOU
3. Cassel should not be asking permission in the first place to create a new product from the idea of an existing item. You don't have to be nice, you don't have to play fair.
***********************
ME
Cassel didn't know it was an already existing blog freebie. She thought it was original too.
___________
YOU
So what? What if it actually was? Take a look around...PS styles (especially wood, acrylic, glass, etc), novelty flair buttons, textured papers, layout templates, extracted bows, actions galore to create everything from the stunning to the stupid. I could go on and on and on and on.
...................
I didn't get that in correlation to what you were saying.
You may wanna calm down a little. It's not good for your heart to be wound so tight.
I'd hate to lose such a font of wisdom who tells everybody what to do and where to go due to the fact that she's had a heart attack.
WV sestifyi -- did that sestify? hahaha fyi.
SHUT THE FUCK UP MAYA!
I've been around this industry as long as you. What, you think you've been around much longer than anyone else and that makes you the queen of digi-shit? I have news for you - those of us that are old timers much like yourself have never thought much of your shit attitude..and trust me it really stinks. You never tried to fit in with any of us, are always starting some dramatic shit (yes, even years ago) and never represented this community in any kind of positive way. In fact you always thought you were better. So, news flash bitch..you have always been and will be an indecent, immoral bitch. That stick jammed up your ass is so far up there that it must be the only thing keeping your back straight. I'll speak for most of the design community - WE DONT NEED YOU. DONT WANT YOU AND DONT NEED THE LIKES OF YOU REPRESENTING US. YOU MAKE US ALL LOOK LIKE FOOLS, BRINGING CONSTANT DRAMA TO OUR LITTLE CORNER OF THE WORLD. PLEASE...PLEASE..TAKE YOUR SUB-PAR DESIGNS AND TEAM AND LEAVE. YOU HAVE EMBARASSED THIS COMMUNITY FOR WAY TO LONG.
---
From one designer to another that has also been around for quite some time---HERE HERE! Im not sure why Maya thinks she rules the roost around this community. She's a know it all vaginal hemorrhoid.
.....YADA YADA YADA...... I'll speak for most of the design community - .....YADA YADA YADA......
July 28, 2010 1:56 PM
Errrr, not. Your diatribe certainly doesn't represent this member of the design community. I may or may not like or support Maya, but I most assuredly do not support your rant. And if most do, guess I'm an oddity and will be content to remain so. I'd like to think most of the design community can communicate and comport itself on a more erudite and intelligent manner.
I still don't get what point you're trying to make. But whatever.
My numbered list was basically a list of things that should have been followed and if it was, none of this would have seen the light of day.
I wasn't getting your point by saying: "From what it sounds like though, Cassel didn't know it was an already existing blog freebie. She thought it was original too. That's what I'm saying." I'm not sure what that has to do with what I said. Whether it's an original product or not makes no difference. My reference to the styles and such was simply to point out that this is hardly the first time designers have copied off of each other. It's called competition and in this business, competition is never-ending. People don't treat it as a business, though, they get way too personal. It ain't personal. It's business.
And I'm not quite sure where your anger is coming from? I thought I was having a discussion. The word verification thingie I put in there was a random statement against people in general, not you, personally. I don't even know who you are, which makes your comment about me being so wound tight or whatever seem even more silly.
"Errrr, not. Your diatribe certainly doesn't represent this member of the design community. I may or may not like or support Maya, but I most assuredly do not support your rant. And if most do, guess I'm an oddity and will be content to remain so. I'd like to think most of the design community can communicate and comport itself on a more erudite and intelligent manner."
OP did say MOST, not ALL but wait while I pull out my Websters to decipher what the hey you are saying, guess I can't communicate or comport myself too good..dem big words confuzal me..
If you're going to quote me, quote me correctly.
What I said was ... "
I didn't get that in correlation to what you were saying.
You may wanna calm down a little. It's not good for your heart to be wound so tight.
I'd hate to lose such a font of wisdom who tells everybody what to do and where to go due to the fact that she's had a heart attack.
WV sestifyi -- did that sestify? hahaha fyi."
......
Where do you hostility in this? It's just facts. Nothing personal. You do seem a bit over zealous but no biggie. I'll quote you in saying ...
The word verification thingie I put in there was a random statement against people in general, not you, personally. I don't even know who you are, which makes your comment about me being so wound tight or whatever seem even more silly.
You make no sense whatsoever, so I'm done with the conversation. Have a good one.
People have a RIGHT to know about this type of dishonesty.
But you don't have the right to bring the drama to a smak blog since you signed an agreement not to or are you to dense to get that fact. You sign an agreement that you won't take anything out of the DCR and here you are spouting word for word so really what does that make you????? Am I suppose to trust you. Yeah right. I wouldn't trust you as far as I could throw you. Don't put this off on me. I didn't bring the drama here. You'd be surprised how well word gets around and they don't have to read it on a smak blog. Try another excuse.
It's pretty much a given that things from the DCR will be posted here - anonymously. There's not other free place to discuss this stuff, and we need to discuss it.
As for admiring Maya for going 'balls to the walls' for her designer,s he could have done that quite well without attacking Cassel. Also it's a good idea to get your facts straight before you defend something that just isn't true. How hard would it have been for her to google 'pop out letters' before she made the statements about them being so innovative and impressive?
it's a good idea to get your facts straight before you defend something that just isn't true. How hard would it have been for her to google 'pop out letters' before she made the statements about them being so innovative and impressive?
.............
can't argue with you there.
FIRST .... How do you happen to have the unedited version of the DCR convo? You MUST be a DST mod. Niccceeeeee. Not.
SECOND ....
"she could have done that quite well without attacking Cassel."
************
What I read from the oh-so-helpful DST mod poster ... it doesn't sound like she was attacking Cassel. Sounds like she was fed up with Cassel's business practices of sniffing around with a "customer who who asked me for a script for this." I've had it happen to me too.
Whether it's something that's been done to death or something mildly different ... why can't she find her own shit?
I'm fed up myself with her asking to script my stuff. It gets old really fast.
Here's my old Cassel e-mail:
Just in case you didn`t get notifications for PM (Happens to me sometimes), I am sending you here, the same request as I sent in PM.
I was asked by a customer, to make a script that would be somewhat similar to _____. I think I can do that no problem, but I wanted to ask your permission first since this seems to be YOUR idea. I would not want to seem like I am a copycat and taking everyone else's original ideas.
Cassel
.......
Anyone else get one of these?
When, come to find out, this Dutchie clearly used a free tutorial and perhaps the free template itself. I
----------
From looking at the product, I'd say she used the free template. She didn't even bother to be original enough to move the word to the top or bottom of the page, but right down the middle, just like the template. Lame!
.....YADA YADA YADA...... I'll speak for most of the design community - .....YADA YADA YADA......
July 28, 2010 1:56 PM
Errrr, not. Your diatribe certainly doesn't represent this member of the design community. I may or may not like or support Maya, but I most assuredly do not support your rant. And if most do, guess I'm an oddity and will be content to remain so. I'd like to think most of the design community can communicate and comport itself on a more erudite and intelligent manner.
July 28, 2010 2:03 PM
---------------
Ditto.
psst - word on the street
ScrapArtist is closing early next month.
I hope the subscriptions for Inside the Scrapartist Studio are honored by Amanda Rockwell.
July 28, 2010 6:31 AM
-----------
Big surprise, not! This is long over due. Nancie hasn't really been interested in that site for a long time. I get the impression she treats it like a dog, that she only pays attention to after it's piddled on the floor or chewed up the furniture.
that whole Cassel/Maya thing is funny. those pop up letters are so original! In fact, they are so new and original that there are atleast 3 filters that I know of (that I've had for YEARS) that will do it with just one click. Yep, original idea right there!
I say let Cassel make the script, and then report her to the filter companies for ripping off their products.
Is Dutchie still selling @ SBG? Have they removed said product? From what I understand of CU you can use GH's stuff as long as you credit her in the TOU. Did she do that?
July 28, 2010 1:07 PM
-------
There is no reason for Dutchie to not be selling as she didn't break any rules. There is also no reason for the removal of the product, unless she didn't follow Gunhilde's TOU. I don't know if Gunhilde was credited, as I never bought Dutchie's product.
I say let Cassel make the script, and then report her to the filter companies for ripping off their products.
You're such an idiot. She doesn't need to use a filter to make her script and most filters can be used for commercial use. Sheesh I can't believe the idiots on this board.
7:37 PM<- Hi there dumbass. I meant report her for COPYING the damned filter not using it.
Sheesh I can't believe the idiots on this board.
^^^^^^^^^^^
And this makes you ..... what? Idiot Chief? Head Idiot? A bigiot? (sorry weak combo of bigot & idiot)Although, I must admit, I kind of like Bigot Idiot.
Just want to clarify on how you'd like to be addressed.
I prefer Queen Idiot thank you very much --now don't forget
I was asked by a customer, to make a script that would be somewhat similar to _____. I think I can do that no problem, but I wanted to ask your permission first since this seems to be YOUR idea. I would not want to seem like I am a copycat and taking everyone else's original ideas.
Cassel
Been there, done that, got the same message as well.
Geeeez, is this all she does is go around taking other designers ideas and making them into scripts? I was pretty put off by it when she approached me, but had no clue that it was such a habitual thing with her. Baaah! Now I'm disgusted.
I think her own words sum it up pretty well: "I would not want to seem like I am a copycat and taking everyone else's original ideas."
Ummmm... well then maybe you should come up with YOUR OWN ORIGINAL PRODUCTS and QUIT copying everyone else's, and making some stupid reference to a non-existent "customer who asked" if you could make this script! :(
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Didn't we already cover this? There are no original ideas. Cassel should just make whatever she's gonna make and forget about asking anyone anything.
July 28th - 9:33 am
I'm a member of Amanda's forum but it's usually a month behind for downloads & tutorials.
Um, I am, too, and I think you get a helluva deal for $50 a year. Out of all the people in digiland who make promises and never live up to them, Amanda is one who delivers. I really don't care if it's a "month behind". Better late than never. And when she falls behind, she always includes huge discounts, coupons, free product. Works for me.
--------------------
Only in this community can someone be a MONTH late and it's okay. All sunshine and butterflies cuz it's "Amanda Rockwell's" forum. So you pay for a year and how many months do you actually get? I'll give Amanda this - she has a great marketing strategy. She somehow has convinced the masses that's she's something extraordinary, when it's clear she's not.
I prefer Queen Idiot thank you very much --now don't forget
July 28, 2010 8:42 PM
^^^^
LOL you must be jewel the queen
Pathetic is the only word I can think of that describes so many of you.
----------------------------------
SHUT THE FUCK UP MAYA!
I've been around this industry as long as you.
------
If you've been around as long as you say, you would know that Maya does not post anonymously.
Only in this community can someone be a MONTH late and it's okay. A
--------
Nope, you are wrong there. This happens in a lot of communities.
Why then did you ever sign the agreement for the DCR.
-------------
It may have been implied, but I don't remember there being an official 'non disclosure' agreement.
Nope that wasn't me.
LOL you must be jewel the queen
July 28, 2010 9:32 PM
******
Jewel said...
Nope that wasn't me.
July 28, 2010 11:28 PM
*****
LMAO!! Took me a while, but I finally figured out what the heck "Jewel" was talking about. hahaa!
Now pay attention, Jewel! We are talking about important shit here! You are not allowed to side-track us! ROFL!
You may want to read the Designer Agreement you sign when you become a DCR member. It is clearly listed that the forum is private and content is not to be shared publicly.
I'm not going to copy and paste but look under the General section, it's one of the last bullet points.
A tacit agreement at best. No one signs anything. However, as the DCR is not what was promised nor what I agreed to when I 'signed' up, why should I keep my end of the so called agreement?
Post a Comment