3 ms·
"I'm happy to copy the css styles for it." vs " I've still coded everything myself." No, you haven't. Seeing a website look that you like and emulating it by
by bandushrew 15y ago
"I'm happy to copy the css styles for it."
vs
" I've still coded everything myself."
No, you haven't.
Seeing a website look that you like and emulating it by creating a blackbox version of it is fine, seeing a website look that you like and grabbing the css styling for it is breaching copyright.
Its also ridiculously lazy in a bad way, getting someone else's css to work with your html is going to be way more painful than simply writing your own.
Unless you also copy the html for it?
Seriously. As a professional you do not get to take other people's work without their permission.
As a civilian you can do what you like, but if you want people to think of you as a professional, you need to act professionally.
- meric 15y agoWhat if you are web browsing and you see a background colour of a site that looks really good, so you decide to get it from the source and use it from your website? "I'm happy to copy the colour code for it." vs " I've still coded everything myself."
- bandushrew 15y agoyep, what if you do? copying a color code is certainly not speaking to copyright concerns. There are a couple of points to consider though. the first and most obvious is that generally a background color by itself will not work well with the other colors on your site - choosing items in isolation like that is generally a fantastic way to end up with coder art (believe me, I know something about how to produce coder art). The thing that good designers do, and do well, is make all the elements work together, generally if you simply take a single element (background color, font sizes, etc) from someone else's site and dump it on your own site without considering the overall effect, you are doing a stupid thing. I don't think anyone here is worried about the sharing of ideas - uses of color, general placement of elements and so forth, taking those things and merging them with your own needs and messages is how new art is made. The problem with copyright usually comes when someone simply does wholesale copying without the process of considering each element in terms of its effect, the message you want to get across and so forth. IMO A 'good faith' copying of highrise done competently would produce something new, something where the source of inspiration can be clear, but where there is sufficient change and obvious consideration of the factors that made your own product unique that there is no question of direct copying. The damage done by straight copying is always twofold, the first is the obvious - the breach of copyright, the second is also clear but many people miss it - a design produced that speaks to a specific product, specific website goals and specific messages is very unlikely to have the same positive effect if transplanted wholesale. That is why wholesale copying is not just a sign of a lack of ethics, it is also a clear indication of a total lack of competence. The person doing the copying entirely lacks knowledge of the process that is required to produce good work, and has no idea why the site they admire so much works so well. Even putting copyright and ethical concerns aside, I would have no interest in working with someone who lacks the competence to understand why wholesale copying is usually a stupid idea. They will not produce good work targeted at my needs, they will produce good work targeted at something entirely unrelated.