[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Legal issues with InvinXble? (I doubt so)



Hi,

Martin Sourada wrote:
I haven't read the whole discussion yet, but I feel greatly disappointed
with what I read so far. First, I have an impression that Mo and Nicu
are somehow biased against Samuele's work. First, some weeks ago, Mo
kept asking Samuele about Moon brushes in the Solar theme, when the
Moons were already removed from the artwork

There is still a moon in the latest artwork. Check the XCF and see.

, next there is the problem
in katana. As nicu pointed out, the original design indeed resembles the
Kill Bill poster, but even though I saw the .ogv file he provided, I am
not 100% convinced Samuele used that katana.

Open up the XCF and see and be 100% sure.

But that's beyond the point
- we all know, the original katana had some licensing issues and Samuele
just wasn't educated enough in that area to discover them himself.

I think we were pretty clear in explaining the issues at the time.

What I'd like to point out is that Nicu is greatly wrong there - the
image that is packaged in Fedora and the Round 3 designs in wiki have
definitely different katana. It's obvious that the blade is based on the
image Samuele provided, and it's also obvious that the hilt is different
from the original image (look at it more closely, it has slightly
different design and also slightly different lighting),

It is very obvious if you download the round 3 XCF from here:

http://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/0/06/Invinxible_2054x1536.xcf.bz2

And open as layer this Kill Bill wallpaper:

http://img1.jurko.net/wall/paper/hattorihanzo_1280.jpg

flip the kill bill wallpaper vertically. hide all layers but the 'da sword' layer and the kill bill layer in the xcf. Nudge the images to go on top of each other. You don't even need to resize them. It's undeniable that the hilts of the swords are exactly the same.


Samuele, don't get hindered by those concerns, I believe both Mo and
Nicu are just trying to prevent any legal issues that might arose in the
future otherwise, and be patient with them - you have my full support!
Just link to the very images you work with (and talk about) to support
your claims, it might be just some misunderstanding somewhere.

This image was listed as being the source image:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sstorari/2826852493/

Are you kidding me?

~m


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]