When you have your email exchange with Facer ask them why there is a problem with using a brand name in a description.
It seems context still requires human decision making.
It’s just a screening tool.
To me it seems like Facer had really small crew, maybe one or two people, who cant afford to spend whole time on checking the flood of new published faces for content. So they use help of automated filter. But telling people upfront, what the automated filter was doing, would save them some of the later mailing and restoring work too.
Yes, and this is true about a number of things with Facer. Now of course no one reads anything longer than a tweet these days but at least the blame comes fairly and squarely back to the user. A wiki that held it all wouldn’t be a bad thing if the community could (and would) contribute.
I have been trying t keep this up . It seems like a list that has been posted a while can not be Edited . So I am going to repost the list whenever an addition comes in .
I see Fossil is near the top already .
If any on has a better Idea for curating this Bring it On .
Just remember No Oysters.
Duplication Before Publication .
I’m curious… do we know of anyone who has had a face removed because it GRAPHICALLY represents a trademark - I’m thinking the familiar hour hand of Rolex as probably the most recognizable piece, but also whole faces that follow a unique, and likely copyrighted design like Ulysse Nardin faces. I made deliberate changes to my recent release to make it less like the watch it was based on, but there are still elements on that face, that could be considered copied in shape, and more loosely, in material appearance. Just wondering whether the bots go that far, or indeed, if Facer themselves manually go that far. I’ve seen some nonsense on here, like using pictures of existing watches, but that’s a whole different ball game. I’m talking about faces that are created from scratch, but based on an existing design.
Most likely, if a company like Rolex or Ulysse Nardin went searching manually through all the watch faces and happened upon one that triggered them, then yes, graphically it could get flagged. But I doubt if an automated bot filter would ever flag it.
you can’t reinvent the wheel.
in this case one could speak of template as inspiration.
As long as the brand name and special design elements are not used.
It’s different with logos and images…
These violations should be noted.
I have a set of Rolex style hands that I altered to avoid their copyright. Instead of their distinctive Y shape mine are peace signs.
A statement by a German lawyer: “If you take a picture and redraw it or change it so much that the original is no longer recognizable, you are the author of the new picture.
You just mustn’t copy the original artist’s signature and must state that you took the picture.”
For everything else, “where there is no plaintiff, there is no judge”
Illegal or legal, when a big watch brand does a request for removal, a small company like Facer does it. It’s not worth the hassle or risk.
Did you know that its a Mercedes? Not as in the car company (though the symbolism is the same).
There is a Beautiful Micky Mouse Face about . I see it everywhere in Peoples favourites . It must have had Thousands of syncs . But that it is not taken down . I think as @SR-Design.vision says the shape and colour is much more difficult to take to court . Something like Zenith is easy for a Bot to Spot in any context so Zipp its gone . Facer do restore the Face after a Bit . But the Duplication is already Published so, that one can get deleted .
Mercedes is the same as Rolex except that the spokes get thinner toward the inner edge of the circle. Rolex stays the same thickness from center point to inner edge of the circle. But all in all, at a glance, you can’t tell a deference. I’ve heard that even T-Mobile has the color Magenta trademarked and have sued others for using a color too close to their color.
Anush Kapoor took a Copyright on BLACK . But the special Black VANTABLACK .
There is also a matching grey.
My point was that the three pointed star is called a Mercedes. It’s also called the Rising Star.
That is true and not just this! There are published watch faces with a stolen image in the background. The image even shows the original icons with the google play store. These watch faces are routinely approved and even in the top 50. I once tried to report a violation but the facer team did not address it, they only referred me again to the same violation report form. I know of several authors who have 100 or more watch faces with a stolen image in the background. I’ve already gathered a lot of evidence!
Attached images are used as background, yes it is true!
That’s not nice.
That makes it harder for the right designers to work.