Frogboy Frogboy

Only MY intellectual property counts..

▼

Only MY intellectual property counts..

A view from the glass house

from WinCustomize Forums

I've been observating (and participating) in some interesting..ahem..discussions with regards to Adam's article on using SkinStudio to import .msstyles files as WindowBlinds skins.

Some intersting "outrage" at the thought that some user, in the privacy of their own home, might run a skin that was originally in .msstyles format in WindowBlinds. That this was, somehow, a violation of the rights of the skinner.

Let's be clear: No one is suggesting that someone should be able to import in a .msstyles skin and then start being able to upload it around. You still need permission. The rights of the skin author should still be respected.

But we also have to have some perspective as well. .msstyles is MICROSOFT'S FORMAT.  It's a format that NO ONE has legally licensed to make use of. And it gets worse - every single .msstyles on the net is a derivative of the Luna.msstyles.  People either reshack luna.msstyles (or an existing derivative of it) to change the bitmaps and data in it or they use a $20 editor that is available that reshacks luna.msstyles with a prettier interface. 

The reason WinCustomize currently does not have a .msstyles section is because of that issue: Can we condone the distribution of what is borderline pirated files?  It's the same reason why we don't include Boot screens that are patched files of the NT kernal (we only support .bootskin and had to write a freeware program just so that we could have boot screens here).  You can't just patch someone else's copyrighted stuff and pass it around.  Believe me, I would love to have a .msstyles section here from a purely capitalistic point of view and if someone can rationalize it for me to have a section for them, go for it - I'm ready to believe.  But like I said, we're talking pretty gray market stuff.

But let's get back - so then the people who object to the idea that WindowBlinds would somehow profit from the ability to make use of .msstyles.  This is apparently somehow different than the commercial programs that have existed for the past 3 years that make use of .msstyles by patching uxtheme.dll.

And anyone who claims that hacking your system files to use .msstyles should explain to others why the main sites that promote patching uxtheme.dll do not have forums.  Even the main NON-FREE developer of a uxtheme patching program removed their forums. The most popular .msstyles distribution site has no forums.  Could it possibly be that it's because of the technical disasters it causes? I don't know. What I do know is how much tech support WE get from people who messed around with their files and blew away their default visual style or had problems when they applied a service pack or something else.  In my opinion, anyone trying to claim that patching your system files (either in RAM or on disk) is "safe" is not telling the whole story.

Puttin that aside - there are already programs making a profit from .msstyles and have been for years. Where's the outrage? But because the handful of original msstyles floating around the net might be able to be added to the 3000+ existing WindowBlinds skins Stardock is the greedy one? Please.

Regardless of the format, the rights of skin authors need to be respected. They are artists.  As the #6 most downloaded skin author on this site, I know something of the work that goes into skinning.  But I also know where my rights end.  When someone downloads my skin onto their own computer, my rights end.  What they do with it on their own computer is their business. People have been downloading and modifying skins for their own use since day 1.  And of all formats, .msstyles authors happen to be using a format that requires them to be using someone else's stuff without their permission in the first place. 

skinning
45,806 views 136 replies
Reply #51 from WinCustomize Forums Top
To the Skin Factory: I certainly agree, been watching this on televeision and its a tradgedy of immense magnitude. I also agree that as a community maybe we could do something about trying to help out these people. I know we cant do much but at this time I believe that every little thing helps. and sure would be a lot better than arguing about stupidity....show that we in north america do care about our Asian brothers and sisters...what does everybody else think?
Reply #52 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Before SkinStudio had a decent .msstyle importer, I'd convert the visual styles I liked manually, so even without the importer, SkinStudio could be used to import .msstyles.
I guess it isn't technically right, but would I be wrong to think that everybody converts somebody else's IP into another format, such as a BMP image into a JPG? I'm sure everybody's even altered an image's size. Does that mean that Photoshop and other image editors should remove the ability to easily convert files to other formats and to easily edit them?
I just don't see how the converter will harm creators of .msstyles in ways they couldn't be before (there are editors for .msstyles that allow people to edit .msstyles too).
Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #53 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I think i'm going to donate to either Doctors without Borders or the Red Cross.
Reply #54 from WinCustomize Forums Top
As the original artists we do and should have a right to control how our graphics are shown in public. Something i don't see happening here. When i asked for that shot to be taken down i was told no. Now i put you may not alter or distribute our artwork in any form. It's clearly stated like on the nVidia skin.


Showing screenshots with the artwork kept intact is one thing and yes would fall under Fair Use. Altering artwork and then displaying is not Fair Use.




wait.. does this mean we should take down any screenshot of your work? I don't understand.
What is you recolor the skin (like WindowBlinds can do as well as Icon Studio). If you show the skin in a different color then what?




As far as Windowblinds importing msstyles into a windowblind format, I think its not a problem. I do find it strange and a little particular. I probably would not have authorized SkinStudio (if I was in charge of the project) to be able to import msstyles. While not illegal, it does seem funny. Particularly since msstyles could be considered hacking.


I think the funny thing about all of this is that people can port over styles anyway fort there own use on their computer. If they show it in a screenshot... it technically should be shown since it is a screenshot of their desktop at its current or previous state(as long as your not showing everything about the new ported skin). Plus, with many complex skins, the WHOLE skin (mouse-overs, animations, alpha-transparencies, and so on) can not be shown anyway. Not to mention the fact that a screenshot is one image compared to the multiple images of the skinned program. PLUS the skinned program is in use (as in the screenshot image can not be accessed as a program; it does not receive user commands)




Conclusion:
SkinStudio 'probably' should not be able to import msstyle skins because msstyle skins operate in the murcky waters of using a hack to operate. Plus, with TGSoft on the scene (and any other company profiting off of the hack), you find yourself associated to them. I don't think SkinStudio or Windowblinds should have any association to msstyles except for the fact that both change elements of WinXP GUI. Other than that, one is authorized and the other isn't and voids the end user agreement with Microsoft. SkinStudio importing those files almost supports the users (probable unknown to them) destruction of their own end user license agreement with Microsoft.

(Windows Media Player being able to import WinAMP skins did seem tacky, but when a plug-in for WinAMP showed for importing WMP skins into WinAMP, I guess that makes it even)

screenshots... I don't know TSF. I too, am interested in what your lawyer said about this issue of screenshots and a user showing a re-furbished commercial (or otherwise made) skin. That would make a good article and discussion.
Reply #55 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Don't freak out Joe. It's not like i'm patrolling the screenshot section. But if i see something i don't like that belongs to us i should be able to ask the admins to pull it. Doncha think?

Oh and Joe if you want to pay her 325/hour fee to ask her i'll be happy to forward you her information. I'm just not that motivated if you know what i mean.

And out of respect to the artist that put their hard work into those icons you mentioned. Don't you think they deserve to be asked if you can show their work altered? Even in a screenshot. Since you downloaded a certain way. Ugh i'm getting drawn into this. This is my last comment.
Reply #56 from WinCustomize Forums Top
SkinStudio importing those files almost supports the users (probable unknown to them) destruction of their own end user license agreement with Microsoft.


It's the hacking of the uxtheme.dll that violates the EULA. You could say that converting msstyles to WindowBlinds saves people from violating the EULA.
Reply #57 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Doctor's Without Borders: Link

You can specify that your donation should go to the Asian relief fund. That's where i made my donation on behalf of TSF.
Reply #58 from WinCustomize Forums Top
This reminds me of the person over on ebay that keeps selling the modified msstyles and calling them his own creation. Even after contacting Microsoft legal department and ebyas legal department, they decided not to do anything about it. So much for property rights.

It's amazing that this conversation has taken place across three different forums and the same result has happened. So many immature skinners whinning that their skins may be turned into WB formats. Well god forbid that happens and the world grows and up and realizes there is something better out there.

The uxtheme skinning engine is a moped that needs to be replaced by WB, a brand spanking new Harley Davidson.
Reply #59 from WinCustomize Forums Top
If Microsoft had made .msstyles an open format for people to use and made it freely available for other people to make skins with then I think there would be a valid point to be discussed.

But skinners to choose to use msstyles to skin are already violating someone else's intellectual property rights...microsoft's. There are a ton of people using programs like Style XP. No doubt the people making that program have made a lot of money off the backs of msstyles authors.

I think it's hipocritical beyond belief for somebody to complain about WindowBlinds users being able to use skins. Skin authors have rights to their images, they have zero, nada rights over the msstyles format.

It's Microsoft's FORMAT. Not the skin authors. The people who make the format can decide how it's used. Since they've let companies like TGT and others profit from that format, why shouldn't Stardock? If some skinners don't like it, then they should choose a protected format. Picking on Stardock is pretty juvenille.
Reply #60 from WinCustomize Forums Top
If Microsoft had made .msstyles an open format for people to use and made it freely available for other people to make skins with then I think there would be a valid point to be discussed.

But skinners to choose to use msstyles to skin are already violating someone else's intellectual property rights...microsoft's. There are a ton of people using programs like Style XP. No doubt the people making that program have made a lot of money off the backs of msstyles authors.

I think it's hipocritical beyond belief for somebody to complain about WindowBlinds users being able to use skins. Skin authors have rights to their images, they have zero, nada rights over the msstyles format.

It's Microsoft's FORMAT. Not the skin authors. The people who make the format can decide how it's used. Since they've let companies like TGT and others profit from that format, why shouldn't Stardock? If some skinners don't like it, then they should choose a protected format. Picking on Stardock is pretty juvenille.


Exactly....wish someone had said that about 3 years ago
Reply #61 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I understand the issue of unauthorized porting and then publishing it somewhere.

What I don't understand is the issue of porting something for your own pleasure (I don't distinguish there between copyrighted or even somehow copy protected work).

As far as I see it, as soon as something legitimately makes it on my machine, I can do whatever I feel like with it. If its a skin I'll modify it to my liking. If it's a copyprotected game that asks for the CD each time I play I remove the copyprotection. As long as I don't go ahead and publish any such derivative work it's pretty much my business, wether or not its bad style. Sure, DMCA says I'm committing a crime.

However, other than it being bad style, who do I hurt? Financially or emotionally or otherwise? Noone, right? I never used SkinStudio for porting skins, but I'd be damned if there would be a function in there that ports WB to my fav (skinnable, commercial) program and I would say "oh geeze, thats not what the WB skinner intended, I can't do that to the poor soul!"

Right now I port it by hand, but refuse to distribute it or even show it. So what? I like some WB skins enough to buy them. I may even port them. But I don't see how it is an issue at all. There would be an issue IF the ported skin would suddenly come out as a commercial skin for my fav program. In which case I'd buy it. But there is NO issue whatsoever if the port is the only way to get that skin to my fav program.

Intellectual Property has, as fas as I see it, NOTHING to do with the whole issue. What happens in your own private space is noones business.
Reply #62 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Jeff, by your argument then every msstyles user should have their skin pulled off every site.

EVERY single .msstyles file on the net (I've yet to see an exception) is a modification of the original luna.msstyles. Most msstyles authors are unaware of this.

You wrote:

No one has any right to alter our artwork in any way without our permission, screenshot or not. Our work is released as a whole entity. Not a kit for people to pick apart and then display in some screenshot section. People i see here tend to abuse the whole Fair Usage right. The artist or studio has full control over who can or can't alter their artwork. I've all ready discussed this with our IP attorneys. So please don't tell me about Fair Use rights.

Therefore every .msstyles on the net is illegal by your definition.  Luna.msstyles was released as a whole entity. Not a kit to take apart and redistribute. But that's how msstyles work. Programs like StyleBuilder or Reshack load up Luna.msstyles, modify pieces of it and save them as a new ane. The original artist/studio (Microsoft) should have full control over who can or can't alter their artwork you say.  But that isn't what has happened with .msstyles.

I don't happen to agree with that reasoning though I am sympathetic to it.  But at the same time, an author that has done this (made an .msstyles) doesn't seem to be in too strong a position to complain about what OTHER people do with the derivative .msstyles on the privacy of their own computer.

Reply #63 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Jeff, by your argument then every msstyles user should have their skin pulled off every site.

EVERY single .msstyles file on the net (I've yet to see an exception) is a modification of the original luna.msstyles. Most msstyles authors are unaware of this.

You wrote:

No one has any right to alter our artwork in any way without our permission, screenshot or not. Our work is released as a whole entity. Not a kit for people to pick apart and then display in some screenshot section. People i see here tend to abuse the whole Fair Usage right. The artist or studio has full control over who can or can't alter their artwork. I've all ready discussed this with our IP attorneys. So please don't tell me about Fair Use rights.

Therefore every .msstyles on the net is illegal by your definition. Luna.msstyles was released as a whole entity. Not a kit to take apart and redistribute. But that's how msstyles work. Programs like StyleBuilder or Reshack load up Luna.msstyles, modify pieces of it and save them as a new ane. The original artist/studio (Microsoft) should have full control over who can or can't alter their artwork you say. But that isn't what has happened with .msstyles.

I don't happen to agree with that reasoning though I am sympathetic to it. But at the same time, an author that has done this (made an .msstyles) doesn't seem to be in too strong a position to complain about what OTHER people do with the derivative .msstyles on the privacy of their own computer.


And there you have it. The defacto way of ending the argument over who is able do what with what format. Authors of msstyles are fumming because because skinstudio can convert msstyles in WB format but they forget that they are the origianl prirates themselves. Their work in some shape or form all came from the original luna.msstyle and therefore is a violation of MS intellictual property rights. But does anyone see the WB community going after them for that....I think not. So why the double standard?
Reply #64 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Jeff, by your argument then every msstyles user should have their skin pulled off every site.



But they are still using the same format. There is no conversion to a different format like .wba

As far as artwork goes i don't see how every msstyles is a mod of luna if the artwork is totally redone. Msstyles is nothing more than a skin format. The artwork is original.
Reply #65 from WinCustomize Forums Top
But does anyone see the WB community going after them for that....I think not. So why the double standard?



What about Apple's intellectual property rights? How many OSX skins can i download here? What about when Luna was released here for Win 98 users. Check your facts before quoting scriptures. How many times did Apple hand out cease and desist letters. I can't stand when people play that holier than thou crap and forget to check their own backyard. Ugh!

But the truth is i could care less what happens to Apple's IP. They can fight their own battles. I don't want to see skins like our Catwoman WMP mutilated and then posted in a format i didn't okay in the screenshot section. Where are my rights? Where are my client's rights not to have their property changed without permission and posted for all to see?

And to be honest i wasn't happy when TGT started porting icon packages to their format. I remember people around here weren't too thrilled either. I wasn't.
Reply #66 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I don't want to see skin's like our Catwoman WMP mutilated and then posted in a format i didn't okay in the screenshot section. Where are my rights? Where are my client's rights not to have their property changed without permission and posted for all to see?



What's the problem as long as that person didn't post that mod to be downloaded? He/she only did it for his/her desktop and showed it off, not give it to someone. You have every right to go after them if it was offered for download becuase you created it, you sold it.

If he/she is using one of your skins it's showing they obviously have some taste as you and your company make some of the hottest skins.
Reply #67 from WinCustomize Forums Top
What's the problem as long as that person didn't post that mod to be downloaded? He/she only did it for his/her desktop and showed it off, not give it to someone. You have every right to go after them if it was offered for download becuase you created it, you sold it


What exactly do you think is copyrighted in a skin? The art maybe? So why do you think someone else has a right to change/modify that copyrighted art and post it without my permission? Why do you assume that if it's not available for download it's okay?

You are missing the point. We work long hours on our work. I've been up since 6:30am working on a project with one of my artists. It is now almost 12 am. I do not want some schmuck taking the work we've done and modifying it any way and showing it public without my consent.
Reply #68 from WinCustomize Forums Top
So by the philosophy spoken here today, i could take a book, rewrite a bunch of stuff, but keep most of it intact and put it online for all to read. But as long as i don't sell it, it's okay?

And if you want to get technical the image where my copyrighted images are (the screenshot) have to be downloaded to be viewed. So you just killed your whole argument. You have to download the image to view it hence it is being distributed.
Reply #69 from WinCustomize Forums Top
So that's what i have to say on the matter. I'm not going to be drawn in on a long debate and my wrist is killing me as i've typed on and off for 18 hours now. If i catch anyone modifying one of our skins and showing it, I'll egg your house.
Reply #70 from WinCustomize Forums Top
The one question posed by Brad that I've still not seen answered is "Do the msstyle skinners feel the same way about StyleXP?

One of the posts over at Custo said something about the msstyle skinners intending their work to be used free with no commercial program needed, and the poster's main complaint being that the work of the msstyle skinners would be used to enhance the sale of said commercial programs.

Aside from the fact that it is a symbiotic partnership that benefits both sides; more skins equals more program installations which means larger demand for skins, a commercial program (StyleXP) using these 'intended for free use' skins never raised any ire that I have seen. It seems that only when Stardock develops a way to use msstyles do some people get upset. This just comes off as a bias against Stardock rather than a problem with using those 'intended for free use skins' in a commercial program.

Simple solution. If you want complete control over how end users use your work, don't distribute them. Or at the most, only distribute them to a few select individuals you would trust not to do anything to them at all. If you distribute them on the internet, you will give away any control over how they are used, with the exception of redistribution without permission which is held in check by the community at large.
Reply #71 from JoeUser Forums Top

But they are still using the same format. There is no conversion to a different format like .wba

As far as artwork goes i don't see how every msstyles is a mod of luna if the artwork is totally redone. Msstyles is nothing more than a skin format. The artwork is original.


The images are their own creations, but everything concerning the .msstyle including the code is not being used with the consent of Microsoft. It'd be like taking somebody's WMP skin, replacing the images with my own, but using their code with a few modifications.

Reply #72 from WinCustomize Forums Top

i could take a book, rewrite a bunch of stuff, but keep most of it intact and put it online for all to read.

Jeff for this analogy to have relevance you would need to alter the word 'read' to be 'look at but NOT read'.

i could take a book, rewrite a bunch of stuff, but keep most of it intact and put it online for all to look at but not read.

Notice how the equivalent 'plagiarism' no lnger is of issue?...

Reply #73 from WinCustomize Forums Top

But they are still using the same format. There is no conversion to a different format like .wba

So you would be okay if I took one of your Windows Media Player skins, changed some or most of the graphics and re-uploaded it because it stayed in the same "format"?

Of course not.  msstyles are unique in the sense that Microsoft clearly did not want third parties to make skins with them. They went through the trouble to make it so that they had to be digitally signed by Microsoft to be used.

Try this trick: Find ANY .msstyles file on the internet. Right click on it. Go to properties. Click the "Version" tab. Look at the copyright field near the top: Copyright 2000. Now look at the company field below to see who claims the copyright on the file: Microsoft.

My argument (obviously) is NOT that msstyles should be banned or whatever.  It is just that anyone trying to cry foul on how msstyles are used by individuals who download them onto their own personal computers really have no room to complain.  Any reasonable site is going to stop rippers when possible. But arguing what people do with a file on their own computers seems extreme.

Reply #74 from WinCustomize Forums Top

I can't stand when people play that holier than thou crap and forget to check their own backyard. Ugh!

EXACTLY. That's what this conversation boils down to.  Customize.org's staff were slamming on SkinStudio not because it converts skins (since they can't defend that since many of them convert lots of things) but because WindowBlinds might profit from such conversion. That's THEIR words. They are very clear on that point.

But at the same time they're making that assertion, they are pointing people to TGT Soft's website to go and buy Style XP to use .msstyles.

And to be honest i wasn't happy when TGT started porting icon packages to their format. I remember people around here weren't too thrilled either. I wasn't.

That is a very different animal because Stardock maintains a copyright on the .iptheme file. Our license agreement on IconPackager states that while the icon author owns their icons of course, Stardock owns the .iptheme file. If TGT Soft could have found a way to convert the icon packages without using the .iptheme file, then they would have had less problem (there is still the issue of unfair competition legalities though).

By contrast, an individual skin author of msstyles has no right on the .msstyles format.

The bottom line is that it's absurd for someone to argue that it's perfectly okay for Style XP or StarSkin or Tune-Up to make use of .msstyles but it is unacceptable for SkinStudio to make use of them. Especially since the INTENT is for the skin artists themselves to be able to port their own skins easily.  If we wanted to make it trivial for people to use .msstyles we'd spend the 30 seconds to patch uxtheme.dll via WindowBlinds and call it a day.

Reply #75 from JoeUser Forums Top
Seems to me the Terms of Submission on WC pretty much cover this - when I uploaded a skin to WC I granted permission for anyone to download & use or modify the skin in any way they wanted except for commercial redistribution (just like the disclaimer at the end of every MLB game), and granted Stardock permission to use the skin for commercial purposes if they chose to do so. Are there similar upload conditions for msstyles on their community sites? If so, having a free program that allows me to tweak such msstyles & convert them to a format that is compatible with my preferred skinning program for my personal use should cause noone a headache. I've never personally ported a msstyle so maybe I don't really understand, but seems that if StyleXP were to incorporate the ability to convert WB skins to msstyle format and someone did a port of my skin for personal use I'd have no beef. Don't think Stardock would either. I'd want the right to refuse permission for commercial or free distribution, however, though I would probably grant permission for free non-commercial distribution, whether TGT Soft derived some indirect economic benefit or not, especially if the terms of use were similar.

Interesting topic.

Cheers,
Daiwa