<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Tutorial Removed</title>
	<atom:link href="http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/</link>
	<description>Photoshop Tutorials</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:14:01 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: anon</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-135218</link>
		<dc:creator>anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 19:56:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-135218</guid>
		<description>I agree 100% so as long as credit is given when credit is due.
There are many ways to acheive an effect in photoshop that has the same end results,but there are limitations as to how many ways the end result is to be acheived.
The only thing that I am at odds about at this time is that if a tutorial is a given for demonstrating techniques for users to learn from then the bottom line amounts to it doesn&#039;t matter again so as long as proper credit is given when due.
Whether it&#039;s the first version of a tutorial or the most recent,both versions are to reach the same goal.
So when the version was removed because of accused plagiarism why wasn&#039;t the original placed in the position?
Is it simply because it requires an individual purchase of the magazine to gain the same technique that may have been learned from someone by experimentation?
Some copyrights go way to far IMHO.
what would have happened had Ford enforced his patent for mass produced combustable engines and cars?
Wouldn&#039;t one say that all other auto manufacturers are infringing on the exclusive ownership of the Ford Motor Company?
How about the Wright Brothers and their first in flight?
Be reasonable and use caution lest one whom is the accuser may not be as galiant as one would think.
Again on the other side of the aisle if one takes it right out of the book to make a profit from someone elses work is lacking principle if thats the situation.
However I find it kind of intriging that no one has actually read the intent of the U.S Constitution and has misaligned it&#039;s purposes regarding.
The purpose to have copyrights,and patents etc is so that the creator&#039;s inventor&#039;s could profit a reasonable amount.
And to promote the advancement of the useful arts.
Currently copyrights are for the life of the author plus 100 years,this hardly satisfies the purpose of advancing the arts or any other idea by limiting improvements and advancements.
Thats how skewed the whole system has become.
So to satisfy both Constitutional requirements at least in the U.S it requires authors and inventor&#039;s protection from monetary losses up to what is a fair price at the current time period.
For example I write a tutorial that takes me a day to compile and I sell it and make $10K wouldn&#039;t you say that is a fair amount to make in a single day?
This is simply some food for thought to think about fair perspectives,as it&#039;s about time we all stop thinking about me and them but as us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree 100% so as long as credit is given when credit is due.<br />
There are many ways to acheive an effect in photoshop that has the same end results,but there are limitations as to how many ways the end result is to be acheived.<br />
The only thing that I am at odds about at this time is that if a tutorial is a given for demonstrating techniques for users to learn from then the bottom line amounts to it doesn&#8217;t matter again so as long as proper credit is given when due.<br />
Whether it&#8217;s the first version of a tutorial or the most recent,both versions are to reach the same goal.<br />
So when the version was removed because of accused plagiarism why wasn&#8217;t the original placed in the position?<br />
Is it simply because it requires an individual purchase of the magazine to gain the same technique that may have been learned from someone by experimentation?<br />
Some copyrights go way to far IMHO.<br />
what would have happened had Ford enforced his patent for mass produced combustable engines and cars?<br />
Wouldn&#8217;t one say that all other auto manufacturers are infringing on the exclusive ownership of the Ford Motor Company?<br />
How about the Wright Brothers and their first in flight?<br />
Be reasonable and use caution lest one whom is the accuser may not be as galiant as one would think.<br />
Again on the other side of the aisle if one takes it right out of the book to make a profit from someone elses work is lacking principle if thats the situation.<br />
However I find it kind of intriging that no one has actually read the intent of the U.S Constitution and has misaligned it&#8217;s purposes regarding.<br />
The purpose to have copyrights,and patents etc is so that the creator&#8217;s inventor&#8217;s could profit a reasonable amount.<br />
And to promote the advancement of the useful arts.<br />
Currently copyrights are for the life of the author plus 100 years,this hardly satisfies the purpose of advancing the arts or any other idea by limiting improvements and advancements.<br />
Thats how skewed the whole system has become.<br />
So to satisfy both Constitutional requirements at least in the U.S it requires authors and inventor&#8217;s protection from monetary losses up to what is a fair price at the current time period.<br />
For example I write a tutorial that takes me a day to compile and I sell it and make $10K wouldn&#8217;t you say that is a fair amount to make in a single day?<br />
This is simply some food for thought to think about fair perspectives,as it&#8217;s about time we all stop thinking about me and them but as us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Base</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-127578</link>
		<dc:creator>Base</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:23:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-127578</guid>
		<description>might want to remove the Referral ID from Jin Y&#039;s post, thats rather cheap.

good thing you removed the tutorial, I hate my articles being ripped off myself, happens atleast once every week and it&#039;s such a hassle contacting an administrator, hosting company, etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>might want to remove the Referral ID from Jin Y&#8217;s post, thats rather cheap.</p>
<p>good thing you removed the tutorial, I hate my articles being ripped off myself, happens atleast once every week and it&#8217;s such a hassle contacting an administrator, hosting company, etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blueice</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-122124</link>
		<dc:creator>Blueice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 08:56:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-122124</guid>
		<description>Hmmm, what makes a tut copyright. Well, its content. Just like anything that has been created by an individual, or individuals. The creator has ownership rights over their creations (as long as they can prove they are the sole creator)

So, by &#039;Copying&#039; or &#039;Mimicking&#039; someone elses work Without permission, is an infringement of there ownership of work.. ie: the copyright.

However, techniques, are not subject to copyrights as they are more instruction than product.  

Example; If you were to copy indentically someones tutorial that would indeed be an infringement on their ownership rights. This is because, the content and product are protected. 
however the very instructions, the technique, the method, are in a grey area when it comes to copyright/ownership. 

Anyone can use a technique to create the result in the given tutorial, some people might look at the tutorial and say, &#039;Yeah, i knew how to do that already!&#039; You can copyright a technique for doing something as long as you can prove that you invented or created that said technique, and that technique or method was the only way of doing something. (This does NOT happen often) 

Now, the safe and legal way to do things is to 1 create your own unique tutorial. (this would be protected by copyright laws as you would be the author) This is similar to anyone who would say write a book or other written article. 

The reason the techniques, instruction, methods are not involved in copyright is the fact that these can be learnt by any individual from any source! 
Also, when you post a tutorial to this site or any tutorial site, you automatically invite people to learn what you have also learnt. This is known as the Freedom of Knowledge Act. 

So, in a nutshell. If you must do a similar tutorial, ensure that your content is not in anyway infringing on the ownership rights of others. If this is not possible then you must ask permission to use in part of full any content that is protected by international copyright laws. And, where permissions are given, you MUST credit the original owner in your work.
   At the end of the day, most people who submit these tutorials have spent a great amount of time and effort into &#039;Creating&#039; a piece of work that best shows of the &#039;Techniques&#039; involved in how to create your &#039;Own&#039; images or designs. 

so remember.. ANY submitted tutorial on any site anywhere, is protected by the Authors ownership rights ie: the Copyright. 

So i defend the decision to remove the tutorial, as this was an infringement to copyright laws. 

I&#039;m sorry if my post seemed long winded, but i hope that i have shed some light on the subject, so that others don&#039;t inadvertantly fall into a similar trap.

Thank you for reading,  and wish you safe and happy creating!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm, what makes a tut copyright. Well, its content. Just like anything that has been created by an individual, or individuals. The creator has ownership rights over their creations (as long as they can prove they are the sole creator)</p>
<p>So, by &#8216;Copying&#8217; or &#8216;Mimicking&#8217; someone elses work Without permission, is an infringement of there ownership of work.. ie: the copyright.</p>
<p>However, techniques, are not subject to copyrights as they are more instruction than product.  </p>
<p>Example; If you were to copy indentically someones tutorial that would indeed be an infringement on their ownership rights. This is because, the content and product are protected.<br />
however the very instructions, the technique, the method, are in a grey area when it comes to copyright/ownership. </p>
<p>Anyone can use a technique to create the result in the given tutorial, some people might look at the tutorial and say, &#8216;Yeah, i knew how to do that already!&#8217; You can copyright a technique for doing something as long as you can prove that you invented or created that said technique, and that technique or method was the only way of doing something. (This does NOT happen often) </p>
<p>Now, the safe and legal way to do things is to 1 create your own unique tutorial. (this would be protected by copyright laws as you would be the author) This is similar to anyone who would say write a book or other written article. </p>
<p>The reason the techniques, instruction, methods are not involved in copyright is the fact that these can be learnt by any individual from any source!<br />
Also, when you post a tutorial to this site or any tutorial site, you automatically invite people to learn what you have also learnt. This is known as the Freedom of Knowledge Act. </p>
<p>So, in a nutshell. If you must do a similar tutorial, ensure that your content is not in anyway infringing on the ownership rights of others. If this is not possible then you must ask permission to use in part of full any content that is protected by international copyright laws. And, where permissions are given, you MUST credit the original owner in your work.<br />
   At the end of the day, most people who submit these tutorials have spent a great amount of time and effort into &#8216;Creating&#8217; a piece of work that best shows of the &#8216;Techniques&#8217; involved in how to create your &#8216;Own&#8217; images or designs. </p>
<p>so remember.. ANY submitted tutorial on any site anywhere, is protected by the Authors ownership rights ie: the Copyright. </p>
<p>So i defend the decision to remove the tutorial, as this was an infringement to copyright laws. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry if my post seemed long winded, but i hope that i have shed some light on the subject, so that others don&#8217;t inadvertantly fall into a similar trap.</p>
<p>Thank you for reading,  and wish you safe and happy creating!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RUGRLN</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-116275</link>
		<dc:creator>RUGRLN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Mar 2009 06:58:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-116275</guid>
		<description>What was the tut about??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What was the tut about??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: manekineko</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-45311</link>
		<dc:creator>manekineko</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:17:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-45311</guid>
		<description>Oh man I&#039;m so glad you took that tutorial down, copyright concerns are definitely more important than learning</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh man I&#8217;m so glad you took that tutorial down, copyright concerns are definitely more important than learning</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: uncivilized</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-41982</link>
		<dc:creator>uncivilized</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 03:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-41982</guid>
		<description>I will say this and only this; art is subjective. We all see things from day to day that we all &quot;rip&quot;. The guy apologized, and admitted fault for not mentioning his sources. I don&#039;t believe anyone is plainly saying &quot;he did nothing wrong&quot;, so to assume so is very juvenile. 

The site did what it had to do to maintain it&#039;s good reputation, but to turn an honest mistake into him stealing bibles from churches isn&#039;t fair. In my opinion, both are at fault. FIN.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I will say this and only this; art is subjective. We all see things from day to day that we all &#8220;rip&#8221;. The guy apologized, and admitted fault for not mentioning his sources. I don&#8217;t believe anyone is plainly saying &#8220;he did nothing wrong&#8221;, so to assume so is very juvenile. </p>
<p>The site did what it had to do to maintain it&#8217;s good reputation, but to turn an honest mistake into him stealing bibles from churches isn&#8217;t fair. In my opinion, both are at fault. FIN.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom B.</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-40510</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom B.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 20:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-40510</guid>
		<description>Good to see honesty.
I agree with Chad, though. Photoshop effects are going to be seen all over the place. If it is an advanced technique, then just put in a mention at the top as to who you have seen also use the effect, or how you thought of it, etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good to see honesty.<br />
I agree with Chad, though. Photoshop effects are going to be seen all over the place. If it is an advanced technique, then just put in a mention at the top as to who you have seen also use the effect, or how you thought of it, etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mac Tyler</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-40369</link>
		<dc:creator>Mac Tyler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 14:07:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-40369</guid>
		<description>Alright we need to get over this as a community and move on. I think we have pretty much beaten this horse as much as we can.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alright we need to get over this as a community and move on. I think we have pretty much beaten this horse as much as we can.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Spedding</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-40092</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Spedding</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 15:23:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-40092</guid>
		<description>Any advances on 99? Lets make this a ton.  100th comment to wrap this up? Have enjoyed this thread enormously.

Gary.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any advances on 99? Lets make this a ton.  100th comment to wrap this up? Have enjoyed this thread enormously.</p>
<p>Gary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Constantin Potorac</title>
		<link>http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-39883</link>
		<dc:creator>Constantin Potorac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 17:45:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psdtuts.com/tutorials-effects/tutorial-removed/#comment-39883</guid>
		<description>I am sure he learned his lesson and write a mind blowing tutorial next time. ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am sure he learned his lesson and write a mind blowing tutorial next time. <img src='http://psd.tutsplus.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!--
This site's performance optimized by W3 Total Cache:

W3 Total Cache improves the user experience of your blog by caching
frequent operations, reducing the weight of various files and providing
transparent content delivery network integration.

Learn more about our WordPress Plugins: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 2/7 queries in 0.008 seconds using memcached

Served from: psdtutsplus.com @ 2009-11-21 12:28:41 -->