How can you say that you aren't breaking any laws? Lets look, shall we?
Quote from UK Copyright Law »
2. Rights covered
The law gives the creators of literary, dramatic, musical, artistic works, sound recordings, broadcasts, films and typographical arrangement of published editions, rights to control the ways in which their material may be used.
The rights cover; broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public.
In many cases, the creator will also have the right to be identified as the author and to object to distortions of his work. International conventions give protection in most countries, subject to national laws.
3. Types of work protected
iv. Artistic
photography, painting, sculptures, architecture, technical drawings/diagrams, maps, logos, etc.
4.When rights occur
Copyright is an automatic right and arises whenever an individual or company creates a work. To qualify, a work should be regarded as original, and exhibit a degree of labour, skill or judgement.
7.Restricted acts
It is an offence to perform any of the following acts without the consent of the owner: Copy the work. Rent, lend or issue copies of the work to the public.
Perform, broadcast or show the work in public. Adapt the work.
The author of a work, or a director of a film may also have certain moral rights:
The right to be identified as the author.
Right to object to derogatory treatment.
As stated before, Glimmar is British, and therefore his works at the very least are governed by this. You may say that it doesn't affect you, because you aren't British, but you'd be wrong, due to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works.
Quote from Wikipedia »
The Berne Convention requires its signatories to recognize the copyright of works of authors from other signatory countries (known as members of the Berne Union) in the same way as it recognizes the copyright of its own nationals.
There is also the Universal Copyright Convention, Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, and WIPO Copyright Treaty that cover international copyright issues. This isn't even addressing national copyright issues, or even forum rules (which have been brought up before).
I think it would be best if you take this down NOW, until you can get permission from the original creators to use their work. Good luck doing that after this debacle, and good luck not getting banned.
As you didn't ask permission to use my 'glowstone texture' or my 'stained glass' painting, please remove them from your pack.
NEVER:
Post Illegal Activity:
- Anything referring to Minecraft hacks;
- Any link or reference to third-party clients or game interfaces;
- Any material that is the work of another individual but is being represented as original. Permission must be obtained from the original creator, and due credit must be given, before including any element of that creator's work.
As regards the free bumps...yes your mix pack gets a free bump up again, but your reputation gets a big bump down and that's not an easy thing to shake off.
We all know what the internet is like, but your cavalier behaviour is an indication of your atitude to the hard work of others on these forums. What really counts here though, is the all important 'forum rules'.
To be clear, please remove my glowstone texture and my 'stained glass' painting.
[edit] I found it particularly annoying that I had to pay you through adfly to discover that you were using my stained glass painting in your pack without permission or credit.
You didn't pay me anything. You were forced to sit through an advertisement while adf.ly pays me.
Anyways, I thought I removed the stained glass painting. Sorry for not giving you credit for the glowstone, I took it from Mixcraft a long time ago and didn't know who made it (although I did change it slightly). If it is alright with you, I would like to continue using it. If not, I'll do something about the glowstone later.
As for my "reputation", I don't really care. Unlike the rest of you, I do not aspire to be the most popular and respected cheerleader there is. I made a pack, people like it, I'm happy. I run a server, people love it, I'm happy. Good enough for me.
Quote from pashow »
Two words: GERUDOKU TOOLS.
Just sayin'.
Your point? I never said I made them, although I did change some of them.
Quote from SuddenLee »
Quote from Sumpumpolis »
wait, does it affect what the moderators can do if I say outright remove the sponge texture I made from the pack, it is used without permission, and has not been removed after being asked twice before?
edit: oh, and the mob spawner. It can be seen on the gerudoku thread I made that too.
Sump, are you in the USA? If so, look up "DCMA" and how to file one. Then file one with Curse / minecraftforum.net, or their host; AFAIK they're in the US so they'd have to comply.
And Glimmar might be able to do worse to Sparx, seeing as he's from the UK.
I'm afraid Sump cannot do anything, as his content is no longer being used in my pack. Thanks for being ignorant and not bothering to check before you post.
@Everyone else: I'm glad you like my pack.
Edit:
Quote from ksheep »
How can you say that you aren't breaking any laws? Lets look, shall we?
Quote from UK Copyright Law »
2. Rights covered
The law gives the creators of literary, dramatic, musical, artistic works, sound recordings, broadcasts, films and typographical arrangement of published editions, rights to control the ways in which their material may be used.
The rights cover; broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public.
In many cases, the creator will also have the right to be identified as the author and to object to distortions of his work. International conventions give protection in most countries, subject to national laws.
3. Types of work protected
iv. Artistic
photography, painting, sculptures, architecture, technical drawings/diagrams, maps, logos, etc.
4.When rights occur
Copyright is an automatic right and arises whenever an individual or company creates a work. To qualify, a work should be regarded as original, and exhibit a degree of labour, skill or judgement.
7.Restricted acts
It is an offence to perform any of the following acts without the consent of the owner: Copy the work. Rent, lend or issue copies of the work to the public.
Perform, broadcast or show the work in public. Adapt the work.
The author of a work, or a director of a film may also have certain moral rights:
The right to be identified as the author.
Right to object to derogatory treatment.
As stated before, Glimmar is British, and therefore his works at the very least are governed by this. You may say that it doesn't affect you, because you aren't British, but you'd be wrong, due to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works.
Quote from Wikipedia »
The Berne Convention requires its signatories to recognize the copyright of works of authors from other signatory countries (known as members of the Berne Union) in the same way as it recognizes the copyright of its own nationals.
There is also the Universal Copyright Convention, Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, and WIPO Copyright Treaty that cover international copyright issues. This isn't even addressing national copyright issues, or even forum rules (which have been brought up before).
I think it would be best if you take this down NOW, until you can get permission from the original creators to use their work. Good luck doing that after this debacle, and good luck not getting banned.
Current laws in the US state that infringing on copyright is only a felony if more than 10 copies are made (doesn't apply here) or if an income of $2500 or higher is made off the work.
How can you say that you aren't breaking any laws? Lets look, shall we?
Quote from UK Copyright Law »
2. Rights covered
The law gives the creators of literary, dramatic, musical, artistic works, sound recordings, broadcasts, films and typographical arrangement of published editions, rights to control the ways in which their material may be used.
The rights cover; broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public.
In many cases, the creator will also have the right to be identified as the author and to object to distortions of his work. International conventions give protection in most countries, subject to national laws.
3. Types of work protected
iv. Artistic
photography, painting, sculptures, architecture, technical drawings/diagrams, maps, logos, etc.
4.When rights occur
Copyright is an automatic right and arises whenever an individual or company creates a work. To qualify, a work should be regarded as original, and exhibit a degree of labour, skill or judgement.
7.Restricted acts
It is an offence to perform any of the following acts without the consent of the owner: Copy the work. Rent, lend or issue copies of the work to the public.
Perform, broadcast or show the work in public. Adapt the work.
The author of a work, or a director of a film may also have certain moral rights:
The right to be identified as the author.
Right to object to derogatory treatment.
As stated before, Glimmar is British, and therefore his works at the very least are governed by this. You may say that it doesn't affect you, because you aren't British, but you'd be wrong, due to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works.
Quote from Wikipedia »
The Berne Convention requires its signatories to recognize the copyright of works of authors from other signatory countries (known as members of the Berne Union) in the same way as it recognizes the copyright of its own nationals.
There is also the Universal Copyright Convention, Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, and WIPO Copyright Treaty that cover international copyright issues. This isn't even addressing national copyright issues, or even forum rules (which have been brought up before).
I think it would be best if you take this down NOW, until you can get permission from the original creators to use their work. Good luck doing that after this debacle, and good luck not getting banned.
Current laws in the US state that infringing on copyright is only a felony if more than 10 copies are made (doesn't apply here) or if an income of $2500 or higher is made off the work.
Funny, you yourself have stated that over 1000 copies have been made and distributed.
Funny, you yourself have stated that over 1000 copies have been made and distributed.
I salute you, Captain Obvious.
Quote from US Justice Department »
"(:cool.gif: Any person who commits an offense under subsection (a) of this section-
"(1) shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if the offense consists of the reproduction or distribution, during any 180-day period, of at least 10 copies or phonorecords, of 1 or more copyrighted works, with a retail value of more than $2,500;
so by looking at those copyright laws, the adapted versions of my runestones i'm still seeing in the pack are a violation of that?
I wanted them removed, not edited.
so by looking at those copyright laws, the adapted versions of my runestones i'm still seeing in the pack are a violation of that?
I wanted them removed, not edited.
Not adapted, sorry. I have drawn these myself in Paint.NET and the GIMP, taking inspiration from your work. Similarity does not mean it is an adaptation.
Edit:
I hope you all know that I have had permission from the creator of GeruDoku and JohnSmith to be using these textures. The only remaining issue is Glimmar's permission.
Alright, lets ask each of the texture pack artists what they value their work as, shall we? Just because they distribute them either free of charge or by asking for a simple donation, doesn't mean that said artistic endeavors don't have high value. You also seem to be neglecting UK law, which is quite a bit more stringent, levying a maximum £5,000 fine and/or six months imprisonment. I'm not sure on the nationality of the other artists that you blatantly stole from, but I know for a fact that you are a thief.
Also, you are breaking forum rules, to the point of earning a perma-ban. The moderators are well within their right to take this down and permanently kick you from the forums.
EDIT: Glimmar has expressly said he did NOT want to give you permission, due to your posting this without following proper forum etiquette, as laid down in the forum rules. You seem completely ignorant of this fact.
Alright, lets ask each of the texture pack artists what they value their work as, shall we? Just because they distribute them either free of charge or by asking for a simple donation, doesn't mean that said artistic endeavors don't have high value. You also seem to be neglecting UK law, which is quite a bit more stringent, levying a maximum £5,000 fine and/or six months imprisonment. I'm not sure on the nationality of the other artists that you blatantly stole from, but I know for a fact that you are a thief.
Also, you are breaking forum rules, to the point of earning a perma-ban. The moderators are well within their right to take this down and permanently kick you from the forums.
What other authors? We shall wait and see what Glimmar has to say, and if he declines to give me permission to use his lovely glowstone, I very highly doubt that one 32x32 pixel piece of work will be appraised at over $2500..
I may be breaking a forum rule right now, but it is being sorted out. Why would one infringement on the forum rules equate to a perma-ban. If anything it will be a few warnings or perhaps a temporary ban. Perma-ban is overkill.
Edit:
Quote from ksheep »
EDIT: Glimmar has expressly said he did NOT want to give you permission, due to your posting this without following proper forum etiquette, as laid down in the forum rules. You seem completely ignorant of this fact.
That may be so, but that was before I even know whose it was. Now that I know who made it, I can actually ask their permission.
If you look back a page, you will find this post by Glimmar:
Quote from Glimmar »
As you didn't ask permission to use my 'glowstone texture' or my 'stained glass' painting, please remove them from your pack.
NEVER:
Post Illegal Activity:
- Anything referring to Minecraft hacks;
- Any link or reference to third-party clients or game interfaces;
- Any material that is the work of another individual but is being represented as original. Permission must be obtained from the original creator, and due credit must be given, before including any element of that creator's work.
As regards the free bumps...yes your mix pack gets a free bump up again, but your reputation gets a big bump down and that's not an easy thing to shake off.
We all know what the internet is like, but your cavalier behaviour is an indication of your atitude to the hard work of others on these forums. What really counts here though, is the all important 'forum rules'.
To be clear, please remove my glowstone texture and my 'stained glass' painting.
[edit] I found it particularly annoying that I had to pay you through adfly to discover that you were using my stained glass painting in your pack without permission or credit.
So far, I see absolutly no sign of proper credit being given, permission being asked, or respect for the work of others from Sparx's. Glimmar, Headhunter, and Gestankfaust are all members of good standing here on the forums, and have been here a lot longer than you. They have earned the respect of others here, and they all acknowledge each other's work, and build off of each other. It would make sense to listen to them, not argue asinine points with them, they do know what they are talking about.
@Sparx10, all you have done here is take other peoples work, edit it, and call it your own. While this may seem right, copyright protects ALL aspects of a persons work, and you cannot edit, change, take it, use it, or do much of anything without getting permission BEFORE you want to do anything. All of the various copyright info that has been posted here clearly states this, and the rules of the forums demand it.
You still have links up to old versions of your pack, would I be correct in assuming that they still have material in them that you have been asked to remove? If so, then you are violating copyright with that material, and ignoring the wishes of the creator of that material.
Glimmar EXPLICITLY asked that you remove his glowstone, along with the stained glass.
Quote from Glimmar »
-Snip-
To be clear, please remove my glowstone texture and my 'stained glass' painting.
Yes, I'm well aware of the fact that this is my first post here, and that many people will be irate that I am posting something like this. However, I am a server admin for the FuG Cummunity, and the FuGcraft minecraft server, and thus, not entire uneducated, I DO read prior to posting.
I do not give you my permission to use my textures either (as you asked me in a private message). I see that you have stolen textures from Sumpumpolis' edit. I am not going to condone allowing you to use mine unless you Remove the textures that you have stolen from these texture artists packs. Even then, from what I've seen so far, I'm not gonna let you use mine period.
You may not have directly stolen them, but copying them pixel for pixel? That is exactly the same, and I am NOT happy with people stealing textures from others. It's like Lehl (Lahl?)'s texture pack vs. Kas' Painterly Pack.
I also see you have stolen from Glimmar. -1.
EDIT: I took a look at the items.png. You have stolen both my cookie item as well as my redstone repeater. I did not authorize you to do so, and you even have the nerve to ask permission for MORE textures even AFTER you've taken two of them? I'm sorry (wait... i'm not), but no. Learn to read yourself... the forum rules.
Edit 2!: I just noticed that you took Ioncat's runestone pumpkin texture as well as the collaborative texture for Iron armor by Visigoth, Sumpumpolis and Ioncat. Take them down immediately, you... retard! >:sad.gif:
The moderators have been informed of your actions, due to your blatant disregard for the forum rules and your seeming inability to take any action to correct said breaches of policy.
Still up to your stupidity huh Sparx? But I see "your boy" isn't around to back you up much. Dunno why you didn't just do what's right in the first place. Let alone after people politely said in the first posts. Seems like you got quite the negative following now though..
btw...which version of Mixcraft was Glimm's glowstone in? I don't ever remember Kool ever having Glimmar's stuff mixed in.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to...."
It looks nice but it has Doku textures in it like the TNT... I feel is your going to post a texture pack, it should brand new. All of the textures made by you.
To be clear, please remove my glowstone texture and my 'stained glass' painting.
[edit] I found it particularly annoying that I had to pay you through adfly to discover that you were using my stained glass painting in your pack without permission or credit.
Quote from Sparx10 »
...You didn't pay me anything. You were forced to sit through an advertisement while adf.ly pays me...
...Anyways, I thought I removed the stained glass painting. Sorry for not giving you credit for the glowstone, I took it from Mixcraft a long time ago and didn't know who made it (although I did change it slightly). If it is alright with you, I would like to continue using it. If not, I'll do something about the glowstone later...
...The only remaining issue is Glimmar's permission.
You can bet your next adf.ly cheque that the only remaining issue will not be Glimmar's permission! Your, "You didn't pay me anything..." line has really won me over...not! I certainly did pay you something. I paid with my 'time', Sparx, something I get 'real' money for in the real world. Yet you got paid for my time by adf.ly. So when you've finished actually believing your twisted logic, please take my glowstone and stained glass painting out immediately, not "I'll do something about it later".
What's at issue here is that you used and are still using something of mine, however small, without first seeking or receiving my permission in flagrant disregard to the forum rules and you are still in 'principle' profiting from it whether by voluntary donation or not.
I may be breaking a forum rule right now, but it is being sorted out. Why would one infringement on the forum rules equate to a perma-ban. If anything it will be a few warnings or perhaps a temporary ban. Perma-ban is overkill.
Because you have been repeatedly made aware of the rules and you continue to violate them.
Because you accept money as a result of other people's work.
Because it's at the discretion of the moderators as to the proper punishment for the offenses.
and... because you've made it clear, on no uncertain terms, that you will not let the refusal of the artists or the actions of the moderators keep you from continuing to do what you want.
A temporary ban would accomplish nothing, if people can continue to download a pack that would not exist but for the work of many others. Basically, the longer you continue with this, the worse off you are sure to be when the hammer finally comes down.
The best thing you could do is to delete the links to this pack, remove EVERYTHING that you didn't make from scratch (that is, blank canvas) and wait to release a pack until you can actually do the work.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Don't know why you should feel that there's something to learn... it's just a game that you play."
I suggest, that we all let it go and stop wasting our time arguing about it. This is completely pointless and doesn't accomplish anything rather than inflating the already large egos of the authors. Those who care, why do you care if some people decide to donate to Sparx? All you have to do is not donate yourself, and voila, problem solved. Then, as for adf.ly, why do you care so much about .04 cents that doesn't come out of your pocket? You sit through a 5 second video, and then claim you've wasted your time; before you express your obviously great anger towards the fact that you wasted 5 seconds of your life. I can understand your disapproval towards this extremely large amount of time you had to spend looking at a screen before you could click a button. Ugh.. It makes me cringe just thinking about it. Also, if your time is worth sooo much time, then why are you sitting at your computer, arguing the merits of someone taking your 32x32 pixel texture, and putting it in a mix pack? To be honest, this does not seem very rational. While i understand that the authors have a right to be angry, why though? What is the point of this? If we agree to give you proper credit, will it end this pointless argument?
I suggest, that we all let it go and stop wasting our time arguing about it. This is completely pointless and doesn't accomplish anything rather than inflating the already large egos of the authors. Those who care, why do you care if some people decide to donate to Sparx? All you have to do is not donate yourself, and voila, problem solved. Then, as for adf.ly, why do you care so much about .04 cents that doesn't come out of your pocket? You sit through a 5 second video, and then claim you've wasted your time; before you express your obviously great anger towards the fact that you wasted 5 seconds of your life. I can understand your disapproval towards this extremely large amount of time you had to spend looking at a screen before you could click a button. Ugh.. It makes me cringe just thinking about it. Also, if your time is worth sooo much time, then why are you sitting at your computer, arguing the merits of someone taking your 32x32 pixel texture, and putting it in a mix pack? To be honest, this does not seem very rational. While i understand that the authors have a right to be angry, why though? What is the point of this? If we agree to give you proper credit, will it end this pointless argument?
The problem is, you HAVEN'T given proper credit, nor have you asked for permission until AFTER the fact, a clear breach of forum rules. You then went and asked for monetary compensation for something you didn't even make, which again is against forum rules, and it seems that you are unable to get it through your thick skulls that this sort of behavior is NOT ALLOWED ON THESE FORUMS. Can I spell it out any clearer?
I may be breaking a forum rule right now, but it is being sorted out. Why would one infringement on the forum rules equate to a perma-ban. If anything it will be a few warnings or perhaps a temporary ban. Perma-ban is overkill.
Because you have been repeatedly made aware of the rules and you continue to violate them.
Because you accept money as a result of other people's work.
Because it's at the discretion of the moderators as to the proper punishment for the offenses.
and... because you've made it clear, on no uncertain terms, that you will not let the refusal of the artists or the actions of the moderators keep you from continuing to do what you want.
A temporary ban would accomplish nothing, if people can continue to download a pack that would not exist but for the work of many others. Basically, the longer you continue with this, the worse off you are sure to be when the hammer finally comes down.
The best thing you could do is to delete the links to this pack, remove EVERYTHING that you didn't make from scratch (that is, blank canvas) and wait to release a pack until you can actually do the work.
What money am I accepting for other people's work? The donations are not for the pack, they are for my server. As for adf.ly, I receive money for successfully redirecting people to an adf.ly link, the content of said link is unrelated.
Quote from ksheep »
You then went and asked for monetary compensation for something you didn't even make, which again is against forum rules
Please point out where I asked for monetary compensation, unless you can't because you are lying and making stuff up.
Quote from ksheep »
If you look back a page, you will find this post by Glimmar:
Do you enjoy being useless? It rather seems like it, as I quoted that post and am aware of its existence.
Adding a proper credits section atm.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
As stated before, Glimmar is British, and therefore his works at the very least are governed by this. You may say that it doesn't affect you, because you aren't British, but you'd be wrong, due to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works.
There is also the Universal Copyright Convention, Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, and WIPO Copyright Treaty that cover international copyright issues. This isn't even addressing national copyright issues, or even forum rules (which have been brought up before).
I think it would be best if you take this down NOW, until you can get permission from the original creators to use their work. Good luck doing that after this debacle, and good luck not getting banned.
You didn't pay me anything. You were forced to sit through an advertisement while adf.ly pays me.
Anyways, I thought I removed the stained glass painting. Sorry for not giving you credit for the glowstone, I took it from Mixcraft a long time ago and didn't know who made it (although I did change it slightly). If it is alright with you, I would like to continue using it. If not, I'll do something about the glowstone later.
As for my "reputation", I don't really care. Unlike the rest of you, I do not aspire to be the most popular and respected cheerleader there is. I made a pack, people like it, I'm happy. I run a server, people love it, I'm happy. Good enough for me.
Your point? I never said I made them, although I did change some of them.
I'm afraid Sump cannot do anything, as his content is no longer being used in my pack. Thanks for being ignorant and not bothering to check before you post.
@Everyone else: I'm glad you like my pack.
Edit:
Current laws in the US state that infringing on copyright is only a felony if more than 10 copies are made (doesn't apply here) or if an income of $2500 or higher is made off the work.
Funny, you yourself have stated that over 1000 copies have been made and distributed.
I salute you, Captain Obvious.
I wanted them removed, not edited.
Not adapted, sorry. I have drawn these myself in Paint.NET and the GIMP, taking inspiration from your work. Similarity does not mean it is an adaptation.
Edit:
I hope you all know that I have had permission from the creator of GeruDoku and JohnSmith to be using these textures. The only remaining issue is Glimmar's permission.
Also, you are breaking forum rules, to the point of earning a perma-ban. The moderators are well within their right to take this down and permanently kick you from the forums.
EDIT: Glimmar has expressly said he did NOT want to give you permission, due to your posting this without following proper forum etiquette, as laid down in the forum rules. You seem completely ignorant of this fact.
What other authors? We shall wait and see what Glimmar has to say, and if he declines to give me permission to use his lovely glowstone, I very highly doubt that one 32x32 pixel piece of work will be appraised at over $2500..
I may be breaking a forum rule right now, but it is being sorted out. Why would one infringement on the forum rules equate to a perma-ban. If anything it will be a few warnings or perhaps a temporary ban. Perma-ban is overkill.
Edit:
That may be so, but that was before I even know whose it was. Now that I know who made it, I can actually ask their permission.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse Premium@Sparx10, all you have done here is take other peoples work, edit it, and call it your own. While this may seem right, copyright protects ALL aspects of a persons work, and you cannot edit, change, take it, use it, or do much of anything without getting permission BEFORE you want to do anything. All of the various copyright info that has been posted here clearly states this, and the rules of the forums demand it.
You still have links up to old versions of your pack, would I be correct in assuming that they still have material in them that you have been asked to remove? If so, then you are violating copyright with that material, and ignoring the wishes of the creator of that material.
Glimmar EXPLICITLY asked that you remove his glowstone, along with the stained glass.
Yes, I'm well aware of the fact that this is my first post here, and that many people will be irate that I am posting something like this. However, I am a server admin for the FuG Cummunity, and the FuGcraft minecraft server, and thus, not entire uneducated, I DO read prior to posting.
You may not have directly stolen them, but copying them pixel for pixel? That is exactly the same, and I am NOT happy with people stealing textures from others. It's like Lehl (Lahl?)'s texture pack vs. Kas' Painterly Pack.
I also see you have stolen from Glimmar. -1.
EDIT: I took a look at the items.png. You have stolen both my cookie item as well as my redstone repeater. I did not authorize you to do so, and you even have the nerve to ask permission for MORE textures even AFTER you've taken two of them? I'm sorry (wait... i'm not), but no. Learn to read yourself... the forum rules.
Edit 2!: I just noticed that you took Ioncat's runestone pumpkin texture as well as the collaborative texture for Iron armor by Visigoth, Sumpumpolis and Ioncat. Take them down immediately, you... retard! >:sad.gif:
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired Staffbtw...which version of Mixcraft was Glimm's glowstone in? I don't ever remember Kool ever having Glimmar's stuff mixed in.
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to...."
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumYou can bet your next adf.ly cheque that the only remaining issue will not be Glimmar's permission! Your, "You didn't pay me anything..." line has really won me over...not! I certainly did pay you something. I paid with my 'time', Sparx, something I get 'real' money for in the real world. Yet you got paid for my time by adf.ly. So when you've finished actually believing your twisted logic, please take my glowstone and stained glass painting out immediately, not "I'll do something about it later".
What's at issue here is that you used and are still using something of mine, however small, without first seeking or receiving my permission in flagrant disregard to the forum rules and you are still in 'principle' profiting from it whether by voluntary donation or not.
Because you have been repeatedly made aware of the rules and you continue to violate them.
Because you accept money as a result of other people's work.
Because it's at the discretion of the moderators as to the proper punishment for the offenses.
and... because you've made it clear, on no uncertain terms, that you will not let the refusal of the artists or the actions of the moderators keep you from continuing to do what you want.
A temporary ban would accomplish nothing, if people can continue to download a pack that would not exist but for the work of many others. Basically, the longer you continue with this, the worse off you are sure to be when the hammer finally comes down.
The best thing you could do is to delete the links to this pack, remove EVERYTHING that you didn't make from scratch (that is, blank canvas) and wait to release a pack until you can actually do the work.
The problem is, you HAVEN'T given proper credit, nor have you asked for permission until AFTER the fact, a clear breach of forum rules. You then went and asked for monetary compensation for something you didn't even make, which again is against forum rules, and it seems that you are unable to get it through your thick skulls that this sort of behavior is NOT ALLOWED ON THESE FORUMS. Can I spell it out any clearer?
What money am I accepting for other people's work? The donations are not for the pack, they are for my server. As for adf.ly, I receive money for successfully redirecting people to an adf.ly link, the content of said link is unrelated.
Please point out where I asked for monetary compensation, unless you can't because you are lying and making stuff up.
Do you enjoy being useless? It rather seems like it, as I quoted that post and am aware of its existence.
Adding a proper credits section atm.