5 ms·

Most of these logos are poor, which means you're going to throw them out. That's all the service includes. [This one](http://stylate.com/portfolio/sporous-com/

by phillmv 15y ago

Most of these logos are poor, which means you're going to throw them out. That's all the service includes. [This one](http://stylate.com/portfolio/sporous-com/ http://stylate.com/portfolio/sporous-com/) is just the domain name in a particular font. They don't even include rights to the font! That is bullshit. I'm echoing the "lipstick on a pig glorifying domain squatting." These guys are like upscale spammers, or group buying discount sites.

tptacek 15y ago
First, it's a logotype. Some of the world's most recognizable logos are, like this, logotypes. Second, professional designers do not give you the rights to the typeface they use for their logotypes. You ask them, they obtain them, and then they invoice you the several hundred dollars the logotype cost them. Third, why would you want the font used for this particular logo? It's a terrible display font. Its only value is in creating logotypes like this one. I find this particular critique unfounded.
- phillmv 15y ago
  >First, it's a logotype. Some of the world's most recognizable logos are, like this, logotypes. I'm willing to accept this. Point to your favour. >Third, why would you want the font used for this particular logo? Because I might want to tweak it, resize it, use it on letterheads, put it on my business card, create sub products that follow the "brand style", etc. A vector drawing at the minimum is essential. That said it's entirely moot because I took a look at their FAQ and: >The logo is a simple mockup designed to feature the domain name but we do send it to you. We have professional logo designers that can tweak or redo the logo if you are interested. Just email us. Eh. Glorified domain squatting. It makes you feel good about paying through the nose for bogus "intellectual property".
  - alex_c 15y ago
    Why is it moot? It's a simple logo and you can use it right away. Naming and branding has been a huge headache and/or cost on almost every project I've worked on. Picking something off the shelf that lets you get back to the more important work of building your product is a godsend. It's not for every project, but for smaller projects it's perfect.
    - sneak 15y ago
      Yes, and there's something to be said for "launch now, iterate later". A "good enough" domain/logotype is sufficient for an MVP.
      - tptacek 15y ago
        It's probably sufficient for the long run too. We fetishize this stuff in ways that real customers do not.
        sneak 15y ago
        FWIW, I chose the name for my company the exact same way Mr. Munroe named xkcd. My logo is a simple (yet awesome) geometric logotype.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - rprasad 15y ago
    Crucial point you are ignoring: if you do not have the rights to the font, then you do not have the rights to the derivative works based on the font. A license to use an image does not necessarily include the license to use the elements making up the image.

by phillmv 15y ago

tptacek 15y ago

First, it's a logotype. Some of the world's most recognizable logos are, like this, logotypes. Second, professional designers do not give you the rights to the typeface they use for their logotypes. You ask them, they obtain them, and then they invoice you the several hundred dollars the logotype cost them. Third, why would you want the font used for this particular logo? It's a terrible display font. Its only value is in creating logotypes like this one. I find this particular critique unfounded.

phillmv 15y ago
>First, it's a logotype. Some of the world's most recognizable logos are, like this, logotypes. I'm willing to accept this. Point to your favour. >Third, why would you want the font used for this particular logo? Because I might want to tweak it, resize it, use it on letterheads, put it on my business card, create sub products that follow the "brand style", etc. A vector drawing at the minimum is essential. That said it's entirely moot because I took a look at their FAQ and: >The logo is a simple mockup designed to feature the domain name but we do send it to you. We have professional logo designers that can tweak or redo the logo if you are interested. Just email us. Eh. Glorified domain squatting. It makes you feel good about paying through the nose for bogus "intellectual property".
- alex_c 15y ago
  Why is it moot? It's a simple logo and you can use it right away. Naming and branding has been a huge headache and/or cost on almost every project I've worked on. Picking something off the shelf that lets you get back to the more important work of building your product is a godsend. It's not for every project, but for smaller projects it's perfect.
  - sneak 15y ago
    Yes, and there's something to be said for "launch now, iterate later". A "good enough" domain/logotype is sufficient for an MVP.
    - tptacek 15y ago
      It's probably sufficient for the long run too. We fetishize this stuff in ways that real customers do not.
      - sneak 15y ago
        FWIW, I chose the name for my company the exact same way Mr. Munroe named xkcd. My logo is a simple (yet awesome) geometric logotype.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- rprasad 15y ago
  Crucial point you are ignoring: if you do not have the rights to the font, then you do not have the rights to the derivative works based on the font. A license to use an image does not necessarily include the license to use the elements making up the image.