Serious Issue

Gota · Post by **Gota** » 06 Jan 2011, 17:27

On the downloads page Windows and mac dont have their proper symbols.

FLOZi · Post by **FLOZi** » 06 Jan 2011, 17:39

Jazcash · Post by **Jazcash** » 06 Jan 2011, 17:47

I've written about this before but apparently jK was too tired to argue or even think about it, so he just removed my edit where I added the actual logos. I've said it before and I'll say it again, using a company's logo to represent the company it belongs to, is not illegal, you would be stupid to think it is. On the contrary, using your own image to represent a company, is a lot more likely to be illegal than using its actual logo.

Hobo Joe · Post by **Hobo Joe** » 06 Jan 2011, 20:07

Yeah, there was a big thread full of arguing about this already. Apparently some people think we would get sued for using the real logo to represent what something actually is, when really the reverse is far more likely.

It's stupid and needs to be fixed.

luckywaldo7 · Post by **luckywaldo7** » 06 Jan 2011, 20:45

We just need someone with permission to edit the wiki.
trololo

Post by **hoijui** » 06 Jan 2011, 21:08

you guys with powers: what you do is stupid! do what we say! cause it is not stupid!

... and we can not do it our-selfs, cause we have no power, so please do it!

Johannes · Post by **Johannes** » 06 Jan 2011, 21:49

hoijui wrote:
you guys with powers: what you do is stupid! do what we say! cause it is not stupid!

... and we can not do it our-selfs, cause we have no power, so please do it!

yes, cause it is not stupid.

Petah · Post by **Petah** » 06 Jan 2011, 22:34

I agree, the real logos should be used.

TradeMark · Post by **TradeMark** » 07 Jan 2011, 01:22

I agree, they should be the real ones.

Jazcash wrote:I've written about this before but apparently jK was too tired to argue or even think about it, so he just removed my edit where I added the actual logos. I've said it before and I'll say it again, using a company's logo to represent the company it belongs to, is not illegal, you would be stupid to think it is. On the contrary, using your own image to represent a company, is a lot more likely to be illegal than using its actual logo.

I wrote before you! (or did i?)

Heres my (new) suggestion:

FLOZi · Post by **FLOZi** » 07 Jan 2011, 01:24

It's a non issue. Close the thread, moderate anyone who brings it up again.

TradeMark · Post by **TradeMark** » 07 Jan 2011, 01:26

Hobo Joe wrote:It's stupid and needs to be fixed.

No, it wont get fixed, because the terr.. i mean trolls are the only people who have complained about it. And this forum moderators does not negotiate with trolls.

Gota · Post by **Gota** » 07 Jan 2011, 01:34

FLOZi wrote:It's a non issue. Close the thread, moderate anyone who brings it up again.

Do you think backseat moderators should be moderated as well?

SinbadEV · Post by **SinbadEV** » 07 Jan 2011, 01:36

I'm both a moderator and also apparently have write access on the download page... I however like the existing icons and see no harm in them... so your going to have to convince someone else.

FLOZi · Post by **FLOZi** » 07 Jan 2011, 01:42

Gota wrote:
FLOZi wrote:It's a non issue. Close the thread, moderate anyone who brings it up again.
Do you think backseat moderators should be moderated as well?

Yes, but only if the front seat moderators are actually doing anything.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 07 Jan 2011, 03:40

oh wow, obvious troll thread here.

maackey · Post by **maackey** » 07 Jan 2011, 04:49

FLOZi you *did* ask for it...

But it is not a non-issue. Its a relatively interesting legal conundrum. Not very weighty; the worst that can happen is we get a cease and desist and change the logo.

On one hand we use the real Microsoft┬« and Apple┬« logo. The issue is not about copyrights, but trademarks. As long as we don't affiliate ourselves with either company there isn't anything wrong with using their trademarks when we refer to them or their products.

On the other we use fake logos which pretty much guarantees we aren't affiliated with either company, but brings into light trademark dilution and other similar problems.

Neither have very dire consequences, and it probably doesn't matter which one we use in a legal sense.

What does bother me however, is how horribly ugly and non-intuitive our download page is. Others have made extensive and thoughtful criticisms so I won't regurgitate it here, but it really does need to be changed.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 07 Jan 2011, 04:53

It should be noted that a corporation is more likely to be upset with you for using a knockoff logo as they have spent millions on that branding. That is the thing with IP, if you do use someone's IP, in this case say the window which has the key elements of the 4 squares, and you change the public image they can be offended.

so using a break off variant could piss them off just as much.

Now saying that this project is in anyway authorized or verified by microsoft, yes that can piss them off greatly.

knorke · Post by **knorke** » 07 Jan 2011, 04:55

maackey wrote: What does bother me however, is how horribly ugly and non-intuitive our download page is.

If you just want to get ready to play, you want this:
Games Downloads

/Gundam_RTS_1.26_Including_Spring_0.82.6.1_Installer07.exe

old spring version

Spring 1944 (Outdated!)

...

KernelPanic

Kernel_Panic_4.1_Including_Spring_0.82.6.1_Installer24_45mb.exe

So maybe zeroK lobby can support several engine versions now but it still seems kinda fail to have 0/3 games be up to date and easily be playable online (because most players will only have newest install)
on a ready to play page.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 07 Jan 2011, 05:04

hang on while I stop everything and make an update post everytime spring decides to do a release, it isn't like I have a life.

if you read more:
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=24809

You would understand this version of spring breaks my startup stuff for singleplayer so the installer is very pointless to update until I make a new release. Being that there are gundam players who play singleplayer exclusively I do not wish to break singleplayer.

I am not making a new fucking release just because the engine has broken something AGAIN in gundam. I am taking my time fixing bugs and trying to make the next release more solid. There will be ANOTHER version fairly soon and the installer will have to be updated AGAIN.

It is seriously infuriating when people cite gundam having a dated ANYTHING without actually looking at why I didn't bother updating.

of course have fun with implying or saying I don't do enough, it isn't like I have gotten to watch a movie or play on my xbox all week because I have been working with every spare moment I have on gundam. Even posting here is being done between loading spring and testing.

knorke · Post by **knorke** » 07 Jan 2011, 05:08

I wasnt commenting on gundam, s44 or kp being fail, i was commenting on the download page being fail.
instead of linking to a new page they should like to the games pages or w/e, not something new that gets outdated.

ie http://springrts.com/wiki/GamesDownloads could use the same links as http://springrts.com/wiki/Games

then for example gundamRTS would link to its modDB page.

wiki+whole webpage is too fragmented and like Chinese whispers, information is double in multiple locations + some outdated.

must be more like on right side, less like on left side.

Spring RTS Engine

Serious Issue

Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue

Re: Serious Issue