It's been a while but I'm back to hold another contest, this time for a database website named "Databasesquad.net". I have run a few contests before and everyone got feedback and the winners their payments. I also have all positive itraders. http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=1059177 http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=968244 http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=967278 http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=828295 Prize: $50.00 Payment: Will be made through Paypal. What I Need: A logo for a database service website called "DatabaseSquad.net". Dimensions: Make it resizable, that's all. PNG or other vectorized file type ONLY! What Should It Look Like: The logo is for a client of mine that does database services such as repair, maintenance, etc. Software database stuff, not hardware. Some major database terms that this website will deal with includes "Cloud Computing" "Cubes" Databases" "Business Intelligence" as well as predicting the future, in terms of analyzing data to obtain what the future holds. Be creative with these terms! I can guarantee the winner will be someone who can make a professional looking logo that incorporates the above mentioned terms in one way or another that makes sense. ONE WINNER WILL BE SELECTED! The contest will end Sunday, January 31st. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PSD, AI, OR WHATEVER WITH THE IMAGE AFTER PAYMENT IS RECEIVED! NO PM's PLEASE! Submit everything in this thread. Thanks, good luck and be creative!!!
I actually deal a lot with the type of people your client hopes to do business with, so based on my knowledge of the "type" of people that your client is most likely to have as prospective clients, I tried to design a logo that was both professional, contained colors that appeal universally to those personality types, while still being fresh and unique. View in your browser: http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/4074/logobase.jpg This is the second version, which includes a shadow under the tools: View in your browser: http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/4012/logobase1.jpg Both can be saved to .PNG with transparency, and include .PSD and fonts used. As you can see, I focused on the logo design. I definitely did not ignore your mention of certain phrases, but your description of them confused me. I understood most of it, except for the following piece: "Cloud Computing" "Cubes" Databases" "Business Intelligence There is either one too few, or one too many quote symbols there, and I did not want to make text when I didn't know what exactly to put. Please correct the error and let me know if this is still part of the design requirement, as well as any other feedback you have for me. Thank you.
You're right about the confusion as I was confused reading that part as well. :-p Since I cannot edit my original post here is the clarification. Expect feedback later tonight when I have more time. Keywords: "Cloud Computing" "Cubes" "Databases" "Business Intelligence"
I don't see how that's "funny", nor (as I presume you are implying) does it contradict anything I said. Thank you for clarifying TechnoKelvin. I'll wait to hear your feedback on what is there before applying more phrases and/or modifying the logo, so I can do both at the same time. I very much notice pixeled is trying to discredit me, and more power to him, I am all for people being informed - I'd just like to note that I do have permission to use, modify and sell the graphics I use, and yes, their combination and concept is a unique one. However, I am not rigid, and can modify what suits you, if you like the concept but not an individual element.
Good catch as per all stock sites policies, you may use stock imagery in advertisements & websites but "NOT" in a logo / Brand that represents a company. A logo / Brand is supposed to be unique. The reason for this policy is because Anyone can download a stock image & use it, so if 100 people use that same image that another company has in their brand name, that's 100+ possible law suits later down the road. My suggestion is to NEVER use clipart / stock graphics, not just because it's against all policies & a company can get sued for using one in their logo, but because it goes against designer ethics. It's one thing to be inspired from another designer (which is fine) & it's another thing to rip their work & try to resell it as your own (against policy & law). Even if a design thats downloaded by millions for free has no lic. agreement attached prohibiting resale in a logo / Brand, It's still unprofessional to use it, as those other million downloaders might try to put it in a logo / brand as well. as soon as just one other person does, the logo is no longer original & subject to law suit by the other company claiming all rights to their company brand name. This is not a personal attack, just an FYI (for your information), so that you know better for the next time
Good information - except you assume I have the same sources, and licensing agreements, as some random person googling does. As for your lawsuit idea, firstly a clipart image is not a "brand name", that would be the actual name of the company or product. The image, if modified to include a name or unique identifier, and if the party was able to prove that they had created the image (relevant PSD) could Copyright it. If another party subsequently also modified the image to where it was unique, and copywrited it, it would be impossible for the courts to decide a case in which the two parties sued each other. This is because both could provide proof of the creation (psd) of the image, and additionally, the images would be different - this is true also if they did not modify it in any way. Lastly, it takes way too much time and money to not only copyright, but then to sue, over what is a $50 logo using clipart. That is of course subjective, but realistically, with a budget of $50 for a logo, the decision to copyright it and then in turn sue, or even rebuttle in a case of being sued (which as I mentioned, is meaningless) simply is not warranted by any business with practices realistic enough to ever be in a position where its logo would be such a necessary asset to its financial performance. Even Fortune 500 companies update their logos. Thank you for your effort, and as I said, the decision is ultimately to the OP/his client, and I am more than willing to modify anything if he likes my concept. Which, in a logo competition, there is only a chance of anyway.
without getting into a long educational debate over your claim that a trademarked brand names image has nothing to do with the brand (as you stated). Please refer to U.S. TradeMark law here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_trademark_law & Here: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/tmlaw2.html Note: A trademark is a type of intellectual property, and typically a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements. I'll let the legal documents speak for them self & refrain from posting on this thread any longer. Good luck to you. @ CH My personal apologies to the Contest holder, I in no way meant to side track your contest & turn it into a legal dispute thread. I can only hope that you can forgive me for pointing out trademark laws in an attempt to help protect your purchase rights.
You can see in those documents that an image is not part of a Brand Name - which is the Name. It can be a part of the brand or brand image/logo, but the name of the brand is just that. It was an issue of semantics. I never said an image has nothing to do with a brand. Its interesting to see that semantics is what you've come down to arguing - I am sorry you took my rebuttal personally, I did not mean it as an attack to your beliefs: I am simply trying to provide the other factual side of this development, and I do believe enough knowledge has been summarized here (and posted in a link to the entirety of the USA trademark laws) for the OP to make an educated decision. Who is to say he would have chosen mine anyway It is good that the members of this forum seek to teach where they can, though in the same "boat" - the members here are generally far from incompetent - if you try and discredit someone's entire case by simply pointing to their weakest argument and inferring that the rest are false because that one may be: people will see past that. I too must apologize for the disturbance here. I am simply trying to maintain my integrity, though I am still a willing entrant in this contest, and definitely able to modify my entry based on feedback. I understand fully if all this talk about legality has shaded the OP's view of me - and I sure hope it hasn't. My purpose in the last few posts was to bring light to the fact that it is not as negative a situation as one may assume when someone brings up the "law" - in this case, perfectly legal.
The image MOST CERTAINLY "IS" part of the brand. By your testimony the Nike "Swoosh" (Being the image) wouldn't be part of their protected & trademarked brand. & you would be completely wrong. Nike would sue in a heartbeat if you decided to use their image in another logo. Same goes for ANY image that ANYONE trademarks. Reproduction in another brand is FORBIDDEN. Plain & simple. The issue here is YOU using an image that is available on a stock site for millions to access & download & then using it in a logo / brand, this means that since MILLIONS of people have access to the source files, the CH can NOT legally claim FULL rights to that image in their brand. You posted the IDENTICAL clipart, not a rendition, not an inspiration, not a rework of it, but the EXACT STOCK of the tools stacked on another stock image. Shame on you! Here's just a few people already using that image::: http://www.sarac.com/eng/component/option,com_facileforms/Itemid,260/ http://www.spoilerdepot.com/Support http://www.encanvas.com/index.html http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/black-screen-while-starting-x-window.html http://www.ppc-reklamy.cz/vyhody-ppc-reklamy/ And the above are just a small handful of it in use already which obviously takes the originality out of it.