[sn0wstorm]

Originally Posted by Jonah 99

Could you give some examples of chips that you feel should not have been made?

Sure... Some examples of chips I made that are against the C5:

[tikipirate]

I think this is a good idea that needs a little more flushing out; I don't own any "tribute" or "copy" chips, but I can see both sides of the issue.

For example, I haven't seen any current WSOP chips I really liked, I don't care for the "fantasy" inlays but at the same time I wouldn't mind having a set of WSOP-like chips. See for me it's the edgespots that matter on that particular chip; I'd take em blank if I could get them, what would your position be on a chip like that?

Additionally, some of the chips where the casino name has been changed to a CTers name (those Palms chips come to mind...the guy even got a table with the logo...) seem to be ok, as long as it isn't a copy of the chip, or a play on words. "Bob's" is probably not going to get confused with "Palms".

In short, I think an agreement on copy cat chips should promote creativity in chip design by establishing a series of critera that allow flexibilty under the understanding of what is acceptable, or how far one can go in using certain design elements. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and if we ignored all things the good chips out there have done right design-wise, well then we'd be stuck with a bunch of weird ass looking ugly chips. Just my 2 2

[Senator_Thack]

I think it comes down to what the actual design is, and what it is trying to do. I definitely think we could do a better job as a community of respecting copyrights (US and Chinese production alike), but I think you can go too far in cracking down on "copied" or "inspired by" designs.

Some examples:

1) My Customs
My custom chips in my avatar are clearly inspired by the Bellagio's house chips. They use the same fonts, and have a similar layout, but the wording and decorative elements are different, the inlays are a different size, they're on a different mold, and the edge spots are similar in color but different patterns. I thought the Bellagio had great looking chips, and I made my own design to look similar. I think that type of "inspired by" should be permitted here.

2) WSOP Replicas
These chips probably don't violate copyright, but certainly don't have the moral high ground in the discussion. Changing "WORLD SERIES OF POKER" to "WORLD STARS OF POKER" and "Rio" to "Riu" is probably enough to avoid losing a court case, but these are clearly profiting off of someone else's design. That said, some of the customised ones with similar edgespots but a customised inlay should probably be OK here. (All that said I'm still thinking about buying some of these.)

3) Bellagio Replicas
These are quite similar to the WSOP chips in that the main concern in the design is, "how close can we copy them without getting sued?" This is probably the clearest case of what we might want to refuse to allow.

4) Valentino
This presents an interesting issue. I think you can make a differentiation between creating this design for yourself if your name is "Valentino" and creating this design for sale as a fantasy chip based on a fictional casino that's name happens to be remarkably similar to the Venetian. Tough to actually know /enforce the difference, though. Also, this becomes a closer call because this creator's superior graphic design skill allows him to create a chip that looks a lot more like the original than my lack of skill allowed me to with my chips.


I don't have a tidy summary to wrap this up, but I would be interested to read feedback from others on my thoughts above.

[Strange]

Great subject for conversation, and a good direction for CT to follow IMO.

So....as in the post above, there are grey areas that would need to be 'approved' by someone on the admin team. That said, what is the scope for the intended rules?

If I get a design approved by PI for a ceramic that clearly violates the spirit of the C5, and then post pictures of my new chips, would you just ignore the post, or delete the pictures, or comment on my lack of taste?

Or perhaps the C5 only applies to GB's that are run via the site?

We have a number of vendors that support the site and who earn money partially, or entirely from designs that would undoubtedly violate C5. What happens to them? Following the idea that 'past sins are left in the past' then we would 'allow' existing designs to be marketed via the site, but not allow new ones?

Are cermaic versions of clay chips deemed 'copycat'? See the fantastic original binion's WSOP design for an example of this.

Finally, does the scope of C5 cover only entire chip designs, or does it also apply to the use of images within new designs - e.g. the lady in the 'Show Em' chips?

Lots of questions, I know.....just what I was thinking on the way into work this morning.

Again, I applaud the initiative.


Oh, and shouldn't this thread be in Site Discussion?

[7thSeat]

This is a great topic for disscusion and I think it would be very good if CT could produce some sort of guidelines for chip designing.

I think that there might has to be different guidelines for the individual custom home set chips, the GB chips & the vendors chips. I also think that this disscusion should include guidelines about how chips are to be advertised.

We are also in need of a distinction between tribute and copy chips.
I guess most of us like or even love the Borland chips so where shall we draw the line?

Although I am pretty sure we all dislike a deceptive chip.

[SandmanDC]

Since I can't design squat, I have no problem with it.
However I can enjoy the efforts of those who are artistic.
Just keep the ideas fresh, and try to stay as origional as possible.
New ideas are the hardest to come by, but the most rewarding.

[*acesandfaces*]

Bravo Ten....Bravo!!!

Some sort of community agreed guidelines would be wonderful.

[daffyd]

Interesting.
One idea I'm toying with might contravene . We'd need a policy on supplementary chips. Eg: I'm considering organising some people to get labels for St Jo's frontier 'commemoratives' of $500 or 25c, denominations that have never been available (to my knowledge).

But that's just an individual selfish thought. I can see the positives too.

Regards,

David.

[Colquhoun]

I am not a copyright lawyer, but an art director, and copyright infrigement can be a serious issue. I deal with clients that from time to time want something that resembles something from the past or a design that spoofs a competitor, etc....

The GENERAL rule, as I have always understood it is that to avoid potential problems there needs to be AT LEAST 3 major points of differnces in the designs. Differences being typefaces, colors, sizes, graphic subjects, composition, etc.
In reference to chips, simply changing the Bellagio name to Bellugio doesn't even count as ONE. In the end, it is up to a judge to determine the validity of the differences.

I understand here that we are not discussing copyright, but our own code of conduct, but I thought I would clear the air on what may constitute copyright infringement, and maybe we can use the rule of at least 3 major points of difference.

This thread is a great one, Ten...I'm on board, too.

[i run 8s]

100% agree on the no copy. !00% agree on nothing that would give one the thoughts it could be a real issue, casino, or fantsy.
8's