All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
AzzaVPS.com DRAMATHREAD
So I randomly found an article on LEB and azzavps.com was using an image that was pulled directly from our website, when confronted they pulled some crap about a lawyer, their web designer, and their investigations...
They were unable to provide any information about their lawyer or web designer, they refused at first to take the image down, finally they did after a few emails to the owner. The image still appears on their web server, and the owner doesn't understand that he did anything wrong.
So, I created this thread in attempt to publically shame them from doing it again, or republishing the image.
Files under examination: http://www.azzavps.com/solus_openvc.png
Screenshot of their website http://www.lowendbox.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/AzzaVps.jpg
Original source of content: http://www.supremebytes.com/virtual-private-servers.php
Current screenshot of comments http://imgur.com/a/VtKHR
http://www.lowendbox.com/blog/azzavps-4-50mo-384mb-10gb-ssd-unmetered-bandwidth-in-chicago/
PS: I love their original and unique website design, very pretty.
Comments
Stealing stuff like this is just shameful, as is their dodging of the problem
Nothing against any of you guys.
But that image your complaining about is just a picture of two logos. I mean you dont own the openvz logo nor the solusvm logo too right? So i guess you can't do any copyright trademark complaint whatsoever with that image.
Thank you aaron for changing the file. I am happy with the update.
Next time, don't make this harder than it has to be.
x1
x2
x3
He changed it. Look at the screen shot from the LEB post. He just changed the image about 5 minutes ago.
He removed the part that said "Powerful. Flexible. Simple."
Regardless, the point was - you can't lift an image from someone's website and use it on your own.
Yes, when the image was taken from my website, when i created it.
The words were the same size, font colour, and font type. Create your own.
If you told godaddy to chill out if you lifted their slogan, would they be okay with that?
Agree on two counts:
1. That you cannot claim rights to that image without written consent from owners of the content of that image you made.
2. That it was a dick move to steal it.
Glad you got it settled. You still did the right thing to speak up about it.
But did you actually "Create it" or did you just copy said image here, paste some here, and then say Aha! I've done it
@DamienSB yes but dont you get it that your complaining about an image that you yourself dont even own? All you did was place two logos together in one image (resize and merge) this does not make you own the trademark of the image content and we can only complain about copyright and trademark violations.
@Simple3x must have also stayed awake during digital rights class
It isn't the logos that i am talking about. It is the "three words" that were placed under it.
It was the exact same image - if he cut together both images on his own and resized and merged them, i wouldn't care.
If you had them trade marked, you would definitely have a case. But the pure fact that they removed the three words says that they knew they did something wrong, so it was good that you made a thread and something was done about it.
@DamienSB the powerful flexible slogan? I cant find it on azzavps?
Edit: ahh they removed it.. yes wrong, but not violating any law..
@Simple3x They removed it after this thread was made.
ROFL...
@DamienSB they did an unethical move, but no grounds for any legal actions, the image included the logos of solusvm and openvz which you do not own. Thus warrants the fact that you dont own the image in whole. This i know what i'm talking about @jarland :P
... Still waiting for their lawyer's information.
They removed it, I am happy now.
No he doesnt own the image in whole. But a part of his copyrighted content found its way into the other provider's website, which is an infringement. I assume that both OpenVZ and SolusVM logos are allowed to be used by any provider of these services. Still, the fact remains that the orange colored text in its particular font, depth and wording was in fact a copyrighted content, and hence illegal for use, without authorization. The fact that it was used along with other licensed content, does not mitigate the illegality of a copyright infringement.
Use of a copyrighted media clip anywhere on a site is illegal.
Use of a unique part of a stylesheet is illegal.
Use of a copyrighted image or a part thereof is illegal.
The problem was they basically took a screen shot of my website, and published the image on theirs.
But, yes. It was the text under the solusvm and openvz logo. I don't really care that they use the logos, they just lifted it off my site.
as per LET drama tradition, @azzavps to offer a coupon code now
Promo code “cheapshot” for 25% off any service reoccurring.
Promo code "StickyFingers" - 100% off any service. The five-finger-discount
@joelgm You can only copyright materials which you fully own. In this case, damien does not own the openvz and solusvm logo. He does however own that simple 3 word tagline, but we base it per entity, http://www.supremebytes.com/images/solusvm-openvz-logo.png one image, one material. How can you copyright an image you do not fully own? Pretty much common sense imho.
Really all this over 3 simple ass words? lol dam
Yeah it wouldn't stand up. Now if you had a custom typeface with a certain license on it..
It all amounts to arguing about whether the image he used is a single entity. Since the OpenVZ and SolusVM images are two seperate images, and these were used along with another image, on a site, one would argue that three seperate images have been used, and that the one image used was a collection of three subsets. A webpage itself is a conglomerate of numerous images, styles and text. Just because the copyrighted image is being used along with other images or text would not make the infringement less.
As an example, suppose someone were to take Apple's well known logo, add a unique tagline underneath it, and merge these elements into a larger image containing a licensed logo of a third party, and stuck on top of a cheap tablet, or a site promoting one. Do you believe that just because all three elements are fused into a third image, you can get away from a copyright infringement litigation on the grounds that 'it was not fully owned'?