Website Design / Forum Upgrade Timeline

[conmee]

Sesh,

The US of A isn't the Wild Wild Scot Hinterlands... we have lawyers up the WAZOO©®™ here to protect the republic as well as peoples' visages. And with most celebrities being BRANDS©®™ these days, using their likeness in a brand or corporate identity is certainly RED MEAT©®™ dangled before the SALIVATING©®™ maw of our legal system. We can splash his likeness all about, but if anyone on DLR's staff is related in any way to Sharon Osbourne, well, we'd have a legal battle on our hands. Just sayin'...

That is all.

Icon©®™

[Diamondjimi]

Well, on a positive note we aren't selling anything or profiting from his likeness. Plenty of fan sites use images of the artist on their pages. The only one I recall making a fuss is Prince.
I think Dave would be proud of this site...

[chefcraig]

"Meet us in the future not the pasture..." David Lee Roth -2007

Uh-huh. And that little phrase has gotten us where presently in 2010?

[Panamark]

Dave hasn't taken me to court over my Avatar, in fact there's a lot of Dave Avatars here.
Free advertising for him I reckon. AS DJ said its not like we are using the graphic to sell
stuff ? What about the Van Halen store ? They have VH faces, and they are making a profit.
Or were they "approved" by VH inc ?

[Diamondjimi]

Uh-huh. And that little phrase has gotten us where presently in 2010?

This...

[conmee]

DJ-

True, we can splash his visage all around. But are the artists prominently featured in the actual logo of the sites you refer to? I mean by definition we could copyright our Roth Army logo, but we can't copyright his likeness if it's in there, and it could be inferred that he endorses the site. And unless we get his actual endorsement, we could, however UNLIKELY©®™, get a call. Here are some guidelines that I just found on the Interwebs...

I think even VH Links at one point got a call from Edward's representatives years ago about a previous logo which, if memory serves, was Ed's Frankenstrat more or less with VH Forums on it.

I'm no lawyer, and I'm probably just being paranoid, what with all the BLOW©®™ and WHORES©®™ I contend with... don't mind me...


A. It depends on the use.
1. A news or commentary related project -- perhaps Time magazine on CD-ROM would probably not require a permission under the First Amendment and/or Fair Use exemptions.
B. There are two important considerations here.
1. Right of Publicity: One is a celebrity's right of publicity -- the right to control the use of one's name or likeness (or any person's right of privacy);
2. Copyright: The other is the copyright protection of a particular photo in which a celebrity or other individual appears.
C. Public Figures are not Public Property: Many people assume that public figures are public property, but this is not the case.
1. Advertising; Commercial Use - not okay: You absolutely cannot use anyone's image, celebrity or not, for any advertisement or endorsement without permission.
D. Use of Exact Image: The image doesn't even have to be a celebrity's exact likeness to be considered an infringement.

That is all.

Icon©®™

[conmee]

PM-

Yeah, but avatars around here aren't the branded identity of a site, with the brand being associated with the business, or in this case the forums, and the possibility of said©®™ use of DLR visage in said©®™ logo being considered an unfair use of said©®™ visage for the purpose of driving more traffic or implying some sort of official status on said©®™ site.

That is all.

Icon©®™

[conmee]

Brethren and Sistren,

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, won't pretend to be one. But I was ENGAGED©®™ to one and seriously, this is the way in which these SHARKS©®™ (i.e. LAWYERS©®™) think about shit. Kid you not. I think it's a great logo, in all seriousness, and the worst that could possibly happen is we probably get told to change it somewhere down the line, but I've been LEGALLY TRAMATIZED©®™ and BRUTALIZED©®™ and the REWARD THE WHORE©®™ justice system really sticks with a person, ya know?

That is all.

Icon©®™

[Diamondjimi]

DJ-

True, we can splash his visage all around. But are the artists prominently featured in the actual logo of the sites you refer to? I mean by definition we could copyright our Roth Army logo, but we can't copyright his likeness if it's in there, and it could be inferred that he endorses the site. And unless we get his actual endorsement, we could, however UNLIKELY©®™, get a call. Here are some guidelines that I just found on the Interwebs...

I think even VH Links at one point got a call from Edward's representatives years ago about a previous logo which, if memory serves, was Ed's Frankenstrat more or less with VH Forums on it.

I'm no lawyer, and I'm probably just being paranoid, what with all the BLOW©®™ and WHORES©®™ I contend with... don't mind me...


A. It depends on the use.
1. A news or commentary related project -- perhaps Time magazine on CD-ROM would probably not require a permission under the First Amendment and/or Fair Use exemptions.
B. There are two important considerations here.
1. Right of Publicity: One is a celebrity's right of publicity -- the right to control the use of one's name or likeness (or any person's right of privacy);
2. Copyright: The other is the copyright protection of a particular photo in which a celebrity or other individual appears.
C. Public Figures are not Public Property: Many people assume that public figures are public property, but this is not the case.
1. Advertising; Commercial Use - not okay: You absolutely cannot use anyone's image, celebrity or not, for any advertisement or endorsement without permission.
D. Use of Exact Image: The image doesn't even have to be a celebrity's exact likeness to be considered an infringement.

That is all.

Icon©®™

Now if this logo is chosen by the consensus as the "one" (hypothetically) how difficult might it be to contact the man or people for their approval?
Is he hard to reach? (I've never tried). Azoff Mgmt.?

[Anonymous]

It looks like Rath Army.

Cheers! :bottle:

[conmee]

DJ-

If the consensus is to use it, probably just easier to start using it and wait for the possible call to change it. I mean, why should we jump through all the hoops, that's what LAWYERS©®™ are for. Let them come to OUR HOUSE©®™ and defend their client's visage... Down with COPYRIGHT©®™ and PATENT©®™ laws I say!!!!

That is all.

Icon©®™

[Diamondjimi]

Hey, isn't Guitar Shark a lawyer?

[Diamondjimi]

It looks like Rath Army.

Cheers! :bottle:

YOu're staring at it aren't you?!


I didn't want to stretch his head wider or people might think it's Tubby McHagar!

[chefcraig]

A little too Sigfreid and Roy... Thanks for playing...

Friend, a little warning first, OK? There goes a good mouthful of Mountain Dew on the keys. Ya fucking bastard.

[Anonymous]

I may suck at Photoshop, but 15 bob says this is the best logo you've ever seen.



Cheers! :bottle: