Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,616
# 21
06-10-2013, 09:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crypticarmsman View Post
Um, remember; if you base used work is modyfied and varies by more than 10% from the original - you're SoL.
This isn't the case, but...

No identifying features from either picture match - the stars do not match, the planets are completely absent from Cryptic's image, and at no point do the nebulae match - the closest matche is the CLO "pillar" - which is against a different color background, broken in a different pattern, surrounded by different features, and illuminated differently in each. Rotating and reflecting Hameed's image can't yield anything resembling that background.

Only the style and the color scheme, both of which are extremely common in artist renderings of astronomical objects, and if either of these things were subject to copyright Hameed's entire collection and that of hundreds of other artists would simply all be violations of Chesley Bonestell's pioneering work in the genre.

Last edited by hevach; 06-10-2013 at 09:49 AM.
Commander
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 273
# 22
06-10-2013, 10:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hevach View Post
This isn't the case, but...

No identifying features from either picture match - the stars do not match, the planets are completely absent from Cryptic's image, and at no point do the nebulae match - the closest matche is the CLO "pillar"....
Quote:
Originally Posted by bootyboots View Post
its clearly a derivative work based on http://imgur.com/YjWu8hl...
I''ve got to agree with Booty Boots that is the same image.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bootyboots View Post
If this was meant just for internal concept art. It should have never left the artist's working folder. Its a bad, risky practice...
I think you're got it right here. This image was probably put together to "sell" the idea to StanD, or for StanD as part of the pitch to get the funds from PWE. And it's "leaked" onto this blog page. I'm guessing that the level of governance for these blog post is pretty low compared to the that for tier one promotional and in-game material. It shouldn't have happened. Something for them to tighten up on
Career Officer
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 28
# 23
06-10-2013, 10:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegeek View Post
It's really close, but not exactly the same even allowing for zooming, rotating, and cropping.

I'm not saying it wasn't an altered version of the same picture... there are a number of images that seem suspiciously congruent. There are also enough differences to make me wonder.

Probably best to file an infringement claim and let it proceed from there. I'm no copyright lawyer and I'm not a PWE employee. We don't know if Cryptic claims to have produced the artwork internally or if they bought it from somewhere.

If it was a variant of the same image, maybe it was supposed to be used as a background for an internal mockup of the UI design and shouldn't have been posted publicly. That's only speculation on my part, since it's labeled as "Concept Art".

Either way, I'll make sure BranFlakes knows about this thread.
Thank you. This type of thing has happened to me before, it is likely that the image was never meant for actual publication and purely made as a mock-up for office use.

The image in question is without doubt my work, though somewhat altered to fit that particular purpose.

As i mentioned before i am a fan, and would add that i likely would have granted written permission for its use as i have done in the past, had i been asked.

My complaint here was more to prevent this happening again to me or anyone else for that matter, there is obviously some source of art within the company that needs to be properly verified, my hope was merely to make the management aware of the situation.


Cry havoc, and let slip the tribbles of war!
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,628
# 24
06-10-2013, 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bootyboots View Post
its clearly a derivative work based on http://imgur.com/YjWu8hl and used to promote a commercial product.
Maybe you should check what "derivative" is.

Its a nebulae, you cannot copyright a nebulae and people have very funny ideas about copyright, you cannot claim something is derivative when itself its "derivative" otherwise photograph would be in a hell of a mess because who take a photo of anything first would have the copyright of ANY photo of that subject.
Former Star Trek Online Player
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,451
# 25
06-10-2013, 10:48 AM
I don't see the pic in the link provided by the OP...

Must be They pulled it already.
...... DaveyNY ...STO Forum Minion since February - 2009
..............Star Trek Fan since Thursday Sept. 8th, 1966
There are No Longer any STO Veterans... We're Just minions who have Played the Game for the last 4.5 years.
I Really Do Miss the little TOP Button at the bottom of the threads.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 79
# 26
06-10-2013, 10:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveyny View Post
I don't see the pic in the link provided by the OP...

Must be They pulled it already.
Yea it was there, they pulled it.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,778
# 27
06-10-2013, 10:56 AM
Yep it got pulled. Just see the gif image that's been posted a few times to get the idea.

-Lantesh
Since Feb. 2009
Captain
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,186
# 28
06-10-2013, 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by brigadooom View Post
http://imgur.com/YjWu8hl

I'm inclined to agree with infinitespaces
from what you posted, I can see the match too. There's a ray coming off the large white star, down and to the viewer's left. As your image flashes between the two, I can see what appears to be the same ray, now largely grayed out, stlll in the same spot pointing between the nacelles. Looks like someone darkened the star but didn't remove everything.
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,348
# 29
06-10-2013, 11:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by f2pdrakron View Post
Maybe you should check what "derivative" is.

Its a nebulae, you cannot copyright a nebulae and people have very funny ideas about copyright, you cannot claim something is derivative when itself its "derivative" otherwise photograph would be in a hell of a mess because who take a photo of anything first would have the copyright of ANY photo of that subject.
It's not a photograph.

"Nebulae, starfield, and planet textures done in photoshop, planets rendered with max."-from the deviantart page.

How do you think Hameed would have gotten pictures of those planets if this was a photograph, anyways? They clearly are not from this solar system.

Last edited by catoblepasbeta; 06-10-2013 at 11:40 AM.
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 812
# 30
06-10-2013, 11:42 AM
The concept artist probably found it on google and hence wouldn't even have known the provenance of the original image. There's no malicious intent here, cryptic isn't making any money off the image itself, it was just used in the backdrop of a mockup of the new character selector screen. and I doubt anybody but the OP would have even noticed it was anything more then a generic hubble pic.

Last edited by f9thaceshigh; 06-10-2013 at 11:46 AM.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:22 AM.