MacBook/iPad High res
- Started
- Last post
- 47 Responses
- MarleyMarl0
If you think using a vector of an Apple product vs. an image is not infringing on copyright you're wrong. And removing their logo doesn't mean shit. The product itself and the design is what's protected and therefore can't be used without permission.
- dummies0
even without the logo, the industrial design of their product is highly protected, your continued brainwash response of "everyone is doing it" and now "I'm going to remove the logo" further defines the absolute point that you know you're doing something wrong but want to edit it to make it yours and sharing the blame with the large number of others doing it makes you just another lost sheep looking for a shepherd with the defense of "i didn't know", though it's obvious you're just ignoring what you don't want to hear.
if you didn't care to do the right thing, why did you ask? obviously you're in this for your interests only. have you ever read a stock photo agreement, they state to avoid brand logos for this exact reason.
I'll safely presume you know why you wish to use the Apple products and appearance for your display, you're banking off their success and trying to imply the same success through yourself by placing it alongside another more successful product, the Apple products.
- the industrial design is protected against use in another industrial design applicationAmicus
- grymes0
Gramme: I'd like to see this thread resolved and die just as much as the next guy, but I must ask you this: How did you go about this 'issue' when you decided to throw an Apple Cinema Display on your website?
- gramme0
Couldn't that same logic be applied to using a standalone Safari (or for that matter, Chrome, Firefox, etc...) browser window?
- MarleyMarl0
Oh snap!
- MarleyMarl0
If you want to use the image then step off your moral high horse and just use the fucking image. If that's too much for your conscience to handler then figure out something else. End of conversation.
- dummies0
of course, however you would have to check with the license holder directly to check permissions & limits of use. I'm sure there is something to be found online regarding the use of such images, this is why you have to gain permission.
You have to understand these rules are their for their brand protection. while you feel there is no harm/no foul, it is impossible for you to know what a brand wishes to be associated with.
porn sites may not be taken in the same league here as say a photography site but I'm sure the don't want the porn portfolio site wrapped in safari & a macbook pro images, that's not the association they want. what if the photography is horrible and not to apple standards?
you need to understand this saturation of shit wrapped in Apple will in the long run be detrimental to the success of the exclusivity that Apple sells. Which is exactly why things like your inital observation exist;
"I went to Apple's press photo pages and their EULA looks like it would prohibit use on, say, a portfolio website."
You have the answer, now abide by it.
- Apple owns the press images on their website. I get it. But I don't think they own every image in the world that has an Apple product in it.gramme
- Apple product in it.gramme
- everytime you see apple in another ad or on a tv show they have permission. i've done work for agencies, i know the rulesdummies
- gramme0
Dummies, you're making a lot of baseless assumptions. Let me be clear that I haven't done ANYTHING yet. I'm merely looking for the best way to present my web and app work. I brought up what you call the "everyone is doing it" point because I assumed that many of the more well-respected firms who, being possessed of a clear understanding of intellectual property, had found a way to show their work skinned onto Apple product screens, in a way that didn't break any laws. Maybe I was wrong. I actually do care about respecting copyrights; if you knew anything about me you'd know that already.
Your last presumption is incorrect and utterly absurd, I've already addressed it, and if you don't like my answer then that's just too bad.
This kind of horse shit reminds me why I rarely come here anymore.
- Horseshit? The facts are horseshit?MarleyMarl
- We apparently have different ideas about the facts.gramme
- Also, regardless of what's true or untrue, there's no need for anyone to act like an asshole.gramme
- Re: horseshit, I was referring to several assumptions dummies makes, as well as the way he jumped down my throat unprovoked.gramme
- without any provocation.gramme
- Gnash0
gramme - you can get images (layered) for the iPhone and iPad here:
http://www.teehanlax.com/downloa…
- Gnash0
I can't think of many examples of an app or device specific website that wasn't featured in context. I find it helpful and I think most consumers do as well. If apple had a problem with it they would have noted it in their developer agreements.
- dummies0
according to teehanlax, things aren't on their side either...
"we’ve painstakingly recreated everything in Photoshop as fully editable shapes layers (works best with Photoshop CS5)."
in other words they took a lot of screen shots and extracted the pieces, doesn't sound Apple approved or provided. then as we continue, their license says...
"License: The sole purpose of this file is to help you pitch, design and build amazing software. It can't be repurposed as your own, nor can it be broken apart and used to create similar tools."
Which is invalid because they are trying to license for their effort of dissecting another party's assets.
Apple would provide something like this if they wanted developers to have it.
- gramme0
So dummies, I have a question for you. How would you show web or app work in context, in a way that you were sure didn't pose any sort of trademark infringement? I'm genuinely interested. Would you just show the layout and hope people can tell it's a website or an app?
- dummies0
Every bit of work I've ever shown or displayed even recommended was as the graphic i made only. I would screenshot then crop.
I never personally liked the browser frame approach, I prefer to show things at 100% so if i'm displaying web, the frame gets in the way, if I'm displaying mobile, the size is obvious in the rendering seen online and most noted if the image alone is viewed on said mobile device
to accomplish your goal provide a screen shot of the view port of each of your projects so whatever device they use, it will be obvious as to which image is for their device
furthermore along that same line, you could serve up only the correct images to selected devices by targeting them via server scripts
that said, think of the inception you're talking about... showing computers on computers, ipads on ipads, iphones on iphones, it's ridiculous,
Just show the work at 100% scale and figure out how you want to show a particular image to a selected device or just provide all options as I mentioned before
- Eh... this doesn't sound like an attractive solution to me.gramme
- Inception? It's just context, man. And my website is for potential clients, not fellow designers. They need clarity.gramme
- I do appreciate the straightforward answer, though.gramme
- i'd rather the work speak for itself, the client sees their work as it's developed, that is the end goal afteralldummies
- you're creating something equivalent to shit photos in nice frames, hackish at bestdummies
- utopian0
Fuck it, just use this!!!
- omg0
Hate all these portfolios that utilize the apple product images in their mockups. Says to me that you're just trying to impress me with Apple's design work because your work sucks. Using it once is okay. But these people end up using their images throughout their entire portfolios. Only stupid people fall for this type of presentations
- gramme0
omg – I'm sure a lot of people skin their work onto Apple products to conceal the fact that their portfolio is garbage. But I've seen hundreds, maybe a few thousand cases where this isn't true. Heydays' work doesn't suck, just as one for instance.
http://heydays.no/2011/lkhjelle/…People try to show their print work against attractive, unobtrusive backgrounds. Why not aspire to do the same for web/app work?
- sorry gramme, i'm finding it very hard to believe that the work does not suck. all i see is a computer monitoromg
- Really? Well, can't make everyone happy...gramme
- The photography and style outweighs all the products on that site. in comparison makes all others suckomg
- the work would be better if not for the apple's style pasted to the front, only to contrast heydays work
omg
- Mishga0
Can't you just put on the footer of your page "ipad and mac photos are Courtesy of Apple “???
"The Image is provided by Apple on an ‘as is’ basis, without warranty of any kind, including non-infringement or ownership. You, not Apple, are responsible for your use of the Image. Any misuse of the Image or breach of this Agreement will cause Apple irreparable harm. Apple is either an owner or licensee of the image, not an agent for the owner. We understand that you will give our company a credit line as follows: “Courtesy of Apple “ and also credit the photographer if noted. "
http://www.apple.com/pr/products…
- MSTRPLN0
Switch up the trend a bit ....
- gramme0
I saw that Mishga, but paused over this part:
"you may use the Image solely in whole for editorial use by press and/or industry analysts. The Image cannot be used to promote or sell any product or technology (such as on advertising, brochures, book-covers, stock photos, t-shirts, or other promotional merchandise). You may not alter, or modify the Image, in whole or in part, for any reason."
As designers we're not selling tangible products per se, but neither are we members of the press. Thoughts?
- yep, you're still not allowed to use it on your site.dummies
