[thelist] Logo Design company graphics
M. Seyon
evoltlist at delime.com
Wed Jan 26 14:23:01 CST 2005
Message from Mattias Thorslund (1/26/2005 03:14 PM)
>dwain wrote:
>
>>do you think that the nike swoosh sold for a paltry sum?
>
>Funny you mention the Nike swoosh! It sold for $35.00. Check Nike's own
>FAQ; e.g. at:
>http://www.nike.com/canada/siteInfo/faq.html
Lovely! I suspected that dwain's statement could be contradicted by I
didn't have an official source to cite.
>M. Seyon wrote:
>
>>>Newsflash. Your Intellectual Property is not some logo you created for
>>>Bob's House of Cookies. Intellectual Property is the ability in your
>>>mind, to conceive and create *the next design*. Creating one design does
>>>not diminish your existing reserve of intellect, or make you less able
>>>to create other designs. Quite the opposite, in fact.
>>
>>intellectual property is the logo. like you said it is the ability in
>>your mind to conceive and create the next design. according to your
>>logic the first logo is not ip because there was not a preceding logo
>>created. usually the first logo you create is in a design class;
>>everything after that is ip, according to your statement. microsoft's
>>intellectual property is their source code, is their really any
>>difference between source code and a logo or photograph or book or web
>>site design? i don't think so, do you?
>
>Neither of you is right on this.
I was speaking figuratively, not literally, when I made my statement.
Apologies if that was unclear. My point was that holding onto the rights
for a logo you've already designed borders on the absurd. The true value
that "IP" attempts to protect is the designer's ability to create.
>Defining exactly what IP is, is thorny as hell. That's a whole different
>discussion, and there are too many misconceptions..
And I agree. It's not something that can be defined readily.
regards.
-marc
--
Trinidad Carnival in all its photographic glory. Playyuhself.com
http://www.playyuhself.com/
More information about the thelist
mailing list