Sigh...

Beep.    says:

But theirs is blue, Dan. Blue. Totally different.

=/
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Matt Brett    says:

It's in the "unique logos" category too. Wow.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Erik Holmberg    says:

Unoriginal bastards.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

simplebitsdan    says:

The response from them via email:

"We buy logo designs from different designers.

Please contact your designer regarding that issue, as if he did several concepts for you, it's very likely he sold the concepts you didn't use..."

It's just can't get any better than that, folks.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

littlerobothead    says:

Sigh is right. These guys are trouble.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

mathewh    says:

wow, crappy. ugh.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

iamglenn    says:

Sorry man, wow, wow. wow.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

simplebitsdan    says:

And it gets better:

"The main shape according to our designer is a font symbol and you do not have the rights to claim ownership to freeware font symbols.

Other than the actual shape, I see no relevance.

Our logo was registered at c-site, the registration has been approved. According to c-site, we own the copyrights to that actual logo.

We do not need to steal anyones ideas."
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

placenamehere    says:

I'm so using them for the rebranded Place Name Here
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Tim Dorr    says:

Looks like they use SteadFast for their host:www.dnsstuff.com/tools/whois.ch?ip=208.100.47 .237&ema...

Just send a DMCA complaint to abuse@steadfast.net. 9 times out of 10 hosts will side with the complaint and take down the content. They do have a right to file a counter-claim, but it will probably be more effective at getting the message across that you mean business. Plus, it's the legally proper way, too :)
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

placenamehere    says:

<< starting now.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

silencematters    says:

Oh Dan, that is rough.
I bet you can build a quick little page that compares the 2 designs and the rights/ownership/authorship of each element. The interesting part about this is that most of us designers know this is wrong, but where are our rights (if there are any) protected. This could be used as a great example to teach a lot of us about and issue we are all lacking in.

If anything, turn it into something constructive.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

cd.harrison    says:

The fact that they are even trying to defend it is mega-retarded.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Suburbia.org.uk    says:

Wow. That kinda sucks :(
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Kevin Tamura    says:

That's just wrong. What a bunch of nasty a$$ bags.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

Thats pretty cheesy and a complete rip off. Also, the name of it - restyling- had to have been thought of from you restyling your site and logo.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

jaywest    says:

Their flimsy defense is just as appalling as the original crime.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Suburbia.org.uk    says:

There's actually a 'Livechat' function on their site, needs Windows to work though, maybe people could call them? ;)
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

MikeWas    says:

Dan, perhaps you need to develop a reputation for suing scumbags like this. I'm astonished at their chutzpah.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

cjoh says:

Group action works well in this case. Dan, don't sue. Write a blog post about it and encourage people to write them and google bomb them with a link to your post and their name.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

cjoh says:

This isn't to say, by the way, that you should say anything that is not factual, or encourage other people to do anything that is not factual.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

ara_p    says:

How do people sleep at night...
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

briansuda    says:

well, you could buy it and then get exclusive ownership, so if it ever happens again then they will sue other companies for infringing on their copyrights. But this is pretty crap!
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Thommy Browne    says:

Dan: this must be so frustrating for you! I would be furious.

Zach Klein found himself in a similar situation:
www.vimeo.com/clip:1061
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Chim Chim    says:

From their responses, it doesn't sound like they actually have a legal team there. Either that, or the legal team hasn't been put into the loop yet.
"We do not need to steal anyone's ideas" is not exactly sound legal defense.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Matthew Anderson    says:

Good God! Is it really too much to expect these days that people who are going to be making money off of it actually design what they are selling?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

bwc    says:

But, it says quite clearly on the page "predesigned logos" they didn't say *they* predesigned it. It was *predesigned* when it got to them, so they're in the clear.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Sevenupcan says:

You would think they would be more understanding and that they would investigate the matter further. I would do it purely to respect the effort that goes into creating unique and individual brand identities,not to mention that I would want to assure my customers about my integrity. You can clearly see who the better party is. If it were me, I would be furious with their response to your email. I hope this resolves itself for you, without getting too complicated.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

jennyberg    says:

fuck no...
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

nothingisperpetual    says:

omg... why?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

cindyli    says:

We need names..... how do we find that out? What designer would do that if they think they can stay in our industry? It's making me seriously ill!
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

monkinetic says:

Geez - I can't decide which is worse, the stupidity or the hubris!


Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

I emailed them via their contact form and got this reply :

Scott,

I already contacted the designer who worked on the logotype to provide the actual freeware font, which includes the main shape used in both logos.

I hope you both understand that if he used the same shape as the freeware font includes, he may not claim ownership.

We'll be contacting Dan with more info soon.

regards,
Peter Olexa
Vilords media

Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

monkinetic says:

I don't know how anyone could look at Dan's logo and see "a freeware font". Sure, aspects of the logo may be inspired from type's curly braces, but to say that because a font is free the logo cannot be claimed as Dan's is like saying that because the tree was free that the violin is not the maker's. Or, you know what I mean.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

According to your website, you did the rebrand in December, correct?

Please check the screeshot for RH Restyling (company from Holland) we did in October I believe. Hmm, I am just currious how it would be possible to "copy" your logo when your "rebranding" was done in mid december.

URL: www.logomaid.com/tmp/simplebitsfraud/simplebi tsfraud.jpg

You'll find out the logo we sell at logomaid.com is one of the concepts the customer didn't choose to use.

We are strongly considering a lawsuit against simplebits not only because of the logo, but also the fact that you are harming our goodwill.

regards,
Paul Viluda
Vilords media
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

mikemcd001 says:

LogoMaid has been short on "goodwill" since there beginnings. Despite rave reviews from upstanding customers like Mr. Blankenship (featured on the homepage), I have a hard time believing that LogoMaid is an upstanding member of the design community. Chop-shops like that do nothing to advance the opinion of design in the business world.

Goodwill my ass.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

simplebitsdan    says:

Paul,

C'mon now. Are we to just trust your word of "in October I believe"?

Your screenshot also tells us absolutely nothing.

It's infuriating and hilarious to me that you're "considering a lawsuit against simplebits". I can without question say I've never heard of LogoMaid before today.

Also, the logotype is not a freeware font. They are four brackets set in Avenir.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

Thanks for your opionion Mike. Although logomaid.com is up no longer than 2 years, our company is in the design and new media business since 98. We did campaigns for customers like Vodafone, T-Online, Nextra, Citroen etc.

Now, let's not talk about our goodwill, let's concentrate on the simplebits issue.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

I never heard of simplebits, to say the truth. Now, do you want to me to find the exact date or should I send you a screenshot saying when the file was created?

Yes, I spoke to the designer and it's not a freeware font. Not sure who you talked to, or exchanged emails with before (I believe Mr. Olexa). He gave you the wrong information.

Did you ever think someone may have the same idea like you...rotating 4 brackets? Or do you think this idea is so unique that only you could create something so "sophisticated"?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

mikemcd001 says:

Well if goodwill is the basis of your lawsuit, then yes, let's talk about it. Let's talk about your designers, one of whom I happen to know, and who I'm even guessing might be the designer of this logo since he has been a heavy contributor to your collection of logos. Let's talk about how you guys buy the left-over logo concepts from low-budget design contests over at SitePoint.com. Why not talk about it? You brought the discussion here, you decided that it was appropriate to threaten lawsuits in a silly little flickr discussion, and you brought up goodwill. I say keep the goodwill discussion going if it is of such concern to you to maintain a certain image and goodwill in the community.

Let's face it, Paul. LogoMaid is a chop-shop logo dealer, selling flimsy left-over concepts to people who sadly just don't know any better. Your goodwill was in jeopardy long before the simplebits issue ever came up.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

mikemcd001 says:

Let's also not forget that logomaid is no stranger to logo controversy, either. The guys at Panic have pointed this stuff out before.

www.panic.com/extras/ripoff

Scroll down to 2nd page of thumbnails, first thumb on that page.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

Of course, the same as web template providers buy web templates, we buy logos. Doesn't mean we do not design 60% of the logos inhouse.

I am not saying I do not want to talk about it, but you are little off the issue, don't you think?

I am sure you do not like our business model and I understand you are mad, as it's much cheaper for people to buy our logos than designing it by you or any regular design studio.

We design over 50 custom logotypes per week, that's over 200 per month. Offering ready made logos doesn't mean we do not provide custom services.

Mike, it's about the market...if people wouldn't be interested in our products, we wouldn't provide it...as simple as that.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

taario says:

Oh come on. Looking at that screenshot, it looks like it was made in a hurry to cover this all up. Very poorly too, if I may add. Logo #4 looks so out of place among the others. Seriously, it's quite obvious you guys ripped Dan here.

And good luck with that lawsuit Mr. Olexa. Make sure you have some extra cash handy. ;-)
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

Mike, don't trust everything you see. That's a bit too much.

The magnet picture was traced and finished in photoshop.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

Taario, of course it was!
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

taario says:

Are you saying that Panic "copied" that logo like Dan did? *snort*
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

we have whole sets of logos like the magnet...do you think all the objects we have are stolen from someones website? Or the ideas. It's about the picture/photo, trace and finish up in photoshop.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

taario says:

I understand, but what are the chances of your logos looking exactly the same as Simplebits' or Panic's? If you took inspiration from those logos, yours would at least look somewhat different.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

Simplebits - the main shape is the same as I guess it was the same font used and rotated. I would lie about the procedure...I guess Dan knows better, I am not the designer. Inner part it different.

Panic? Says lookalike ... you know how many similar magnets could be out there? It's an object
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

taario says:

Panic? Says lookalike ... you know how many similar magnets could be out there? It's an object

Yeah, so if there are "many similar magnets" out there, why was yours exactly the same as Panic's? That's the only thing I'm having trouble understanding here.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

how the same?

- different angle
- different shape if you see the detail

I guess when it would be blue, it would look different to you :), but red is pretty characteristic for a magnet, correct?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Shutterthumb    says:

I'm so tired of this crap.

Dan, I think it's time to take the gloves off. Lets raise the cash (should be easy enough to do with the network we're tapped into) and send out a message.

I'll chip in $500 to get the fund going.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

Paul,

Did you take a moment to read Dan's post about his new logo. Take note the following quotes from that post :

"Several months ago, I finally started on a new logo design"

So Dan's logo was made several months before December.

"It went rather quickly, playing with four curly brackets set in Avenir that created a frame around a hand-drawn cube..."

After creating the logo Dan spent months updating the design of his site and then revealed a new site/logo around December 4th.

Over 30 people have already commented that the LogoMaid version is a copy. None of us have a single thing to gain. We are here because we know of Dan's work and are happy to support him as well as other well known web designers when this sort of thing happens.

Rarely are logos blatantly reused. The person who copied SimpleBit's logo tried to hide their tracks by making a few small tweaks to the original. 9rules recently had their logo copied. It wasn't an exact match, but when it was viewed by someone familiar with 9rules site it was obviously a copy. They took the original, flipped it, modified the color a bit and changed a leaf.

This is exactly what happened with Dan's logo. It was copied, the door was added to the left side of the block and the top was made into a roof. To say its just coincidence is ignoring the obvious. There is a reason Dan used the brackets in his logo, they are used extensively in CSS which is what Dan uses to make standards compliant websites. Are we to believe that the font Dan mentions using in making his logo is the same another designer just happened to chose in making a logo that mirrors SimpleBits? Then they both decided to make a box out of them? And then they both decide to put a box inside? Not coincidence, plain and simple theft of SimpleBit's design.

If its not obvious yet you have two choices. Drag this out and LogoMaid will suffer. Do the right thing and just take it down and this whole conversation ends.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

Now are you serious about the house? Left door was added? Check simplebits and check our house. What's similar about that?

Ok so you say it was a leak of informations from Dan's office? Is that what are you trying to say? If he did the logotype months before publishing it. Or espionage? Common, you're funny.

One more thing Scott, you forgot we got the logo registered.

I am pretty confident, that our logotype is the original.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

markmeeker    says:

wow, it appears that logomaid owns the copyright on the apple logo too.

www.logomaid.com/detail.php?uid=679&mainc at=1
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

thomasrichards says:

The main shape according to our designer is a font symbol and you do not have the rights to claim ownership to freeware font symbols...

Just so everyone knows, its perfectly acceptable to take public domain elements (e.g. curly brackets) and arrange them in a way that warrants copyright protection (e.g. rotating and making a box out of them). I mean, to not do so would mean that every book wouldn't have copyright because the individual words were already in the public domain.

Furthermore, different elements can be afforded protection. For example, the brackets alone, regardless of the content inside, may be original enough to warrant protection. And one does not need to publish a logo design to gain copyright protection. As soon as the logo is fixed in any medium, whether seen by one or a million, copyright attaches.

I only state this because some responses (and not just the one I quoted–and not just the ones on this comment thread) have been legally-moronic; the above isn't an opinion on right or wrong.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

Both logos are made with the same font, making a box out of the brackets with a box inside. Your box has a door and a roof. Dan's door is in the back, you can't see it and his roof is flat. Just kidding, are you looking at the same logo the other 30 people on here are looking at? Its a copy that has been slightly modified. Anyone looking at Dan's logo that sees the logo in question can see this, well everyone but you.

You need to read about copyright laws. The logo was copyright the moment Dan made it.

Copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created in fixed form. The copyright in the work of authorship immediately becomes the property of the author who created the work. Only the author or those deriving their rights through the author can rightfully claim copyright.

The fact that you were able to register it was a mistake. The logo was stolen and last I checked its against the law to sell stuff that was stolen.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

Paul, after seeing this :

markmeeker said "wow, it appears that logomaid owns the copyright on the apple logo too."

www.logomaid.com/detail.php?uid=679&mainc at=1

SimpleBits might be the least of your worries. Now, let me guess...oh I know...Apples logo is white and doesn't have a ring around it? Is that one registered as well? Can't wait to hear your reply one this one...
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

Right, so why do we have copyrights and trademarks? Hmm, waste of money? The box and the house is definitely not similar. Regarding the brackets -> I bet there are several logos which use the same "background".
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

polarbearlamps    says:

Thundercats, hoooooooo!
www.logomaid.com/detail.php?uid=4487&main cat=1
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ThunderCats_logo. svg

Check mate!
www.logomaid.com/detail.php?uid=4275&main cat=1
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Apple_Chess_Icon. png

I like this game
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

Damn, I guess they are just all coincidences. The Thundercats is a bit of a stretch but the Chess logo is practically a trace of the original.

You were quick to take that Apple Store logo down weren't you? But not fast enough...


Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Andy Croll    says:

www.flickr.com/photos/7505195@N08/

Apparently Flickr thinks our resident thief is 'friends' with Dan...
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

No coinsidencies, the apple logo was not supposed to be there. Was moved to non-unique logos.

Thundercats? Snake vs. Tiger?

Go ahead, I am just glad you are inspecting all products.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

The Apple logo is unique and it belongs to Apple. I'm sure they'd be interested to know that you are trying to make money off of their logo.

www.logomaid.com/detail.php?uid=679&mainc at=2
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

The icon is ok for anyone selling apple products. You know how many similar icons are being sold as icon sets and people use them?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

ryanriley    says:

The apple in the logo is a blatant copy of the Apple logo and is bad enough, but including the text 'Apple Store' beneath it couldn't make it more obvious...
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

ryanriley    says:

Does LogoMaid sell Apple products?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

M. Keefe    says:

Dan,

Fight it to the death and if you need financial backup... let me know.

Ok lets look at the facts.
2 rips -> LogoMaid
0 -> Dan

You decide?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

are the ones selling apple icons selling apple products?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

Show me someone else selling an Apple logo. Apple allows authorized companies to use their logo, not sell it. If you are so sure its ok then why not ask them...

www.apple.com/legal/contacts.html
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

ryanriley    says:

Who sells apple icons?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

Paul, you might want to read this :

www.apple.com/legal/trademark/guidelinesfor3r dparties.html
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

hamoozie says:

I will also chip in to any fund - I think Dan has a good idea there. The network you high caliber guys have going could seriously do some damage to these frauds.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

ryanriley > do a research at google and you'll find out
scott > We never intended to infringe apple's copyrights, the symbol was designed for apple distributors, forums and such.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

Right, if we were doing illegal business activies I would spend 4 hours online clearing up the issue.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

jnewland    says:

Give it a rest, Paul.The more we dig, the more violations we'll find. You've done a good job demonstrating your lack of understanding of copyright law here so far. It's a shame you didn't think about that, especially when you're considering to sue Simplebits.

Actually, hell, I take it all back. Keep kicking and screaming, Paul. I'd be happy to throw in some cash and see you and LogoFraud go down.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

mikemcd001 says:

No, Paul, you'd spend 4 hours online trying to JUSTIFY doing illegal business.

Only no one is buying it here.

That apple logo is a blatant rip. It's amazing you're actually still here, keeping this discussion alive. I was content with making one comment about it, but you had to just keep coming back with the pathetic excuses. Well, this is what you get for it.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

M. Keefe    says:

Paul, do you have any idea how tight this community is? Then to come back with the typical "it wasn't me" response. Personally I have a lot of financial/legal contacts and would love nothing more than to see one of these slime companies put in the ground. Then maybe the others will learn that ripping is wrong, illegal and won't be taken lightly.

Also, do you think Dan built that logo overnight? Well if you do then you have proven mine and everyone elses point.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vilords says:

Obviously this doesn't lead nowhere.

jnewland > stopping "kicking and screeming"
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vasta    says:

"I never heard of simplebits, to say the truth."

Did they really say that? Nooooo way. Who hasn't heard of SimpleBits? That just ruined their credibility in my eyes.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

M. Keefe    says:

@vasta, that's is simply the most common defense of a ripper. "Oh, I didn't know it existed"... sigh
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

aronoff    says:

Vilords, here's the thing. Both are 100 percent exactly the same!! If your in the logo business, and you make 36500 logos a second, should dropping this one really be that big of a deal to you?

I mean c'mon.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

vasta    says:

Yeah, it just shocks me that a "design" company wouldn't know of Dan, who is one of the best designers I have ever come across. Crazy.

You know, I think I'm going to write a blog post about this tomorrow. Not that anyone reads my blog, but just to speak my mind. Right now, I sleep.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

jimrenaud    says:

That can't be the real Joshua Blankenship quoted on the LogoMaid site. Tell me it ain't so, Shua?

The photo of the guy has no facial hair, so it can't be Blanksy.

Maybe LogoMaid is also stealing identities as well as logo "ideas."
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Andy Croll    says:

> Obviously this doesn't lead nowhere.

So it does lead somewhere? It's clear from your comments you have little or no understanding of copyright law, English or even good manners.

The simple solution is a mea culpa, the removal of your shiny 200-buck rip off and a promise to 'research google' to find out exactly who is who in the industry you of which you wish to be part.

I suspect however all that will occur is more pre-school, it wasn't me excuses and vague legal willy-waving.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Joshua Blankenship    says:

@ Renaud - Wow... I didn't know I gave testimonials. I feel violated.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

tanjatiziana    says:

*sniff sniff*

Someone's pants are on fire.

*cough vilord cough*
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

midster05 says:

I think everyone who wants to use a logo should register and copyright it. Dan can blame just himself he didn't do it.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Chim Chim    says:

@midster05, did you sign on to flickr just to let Dan know it's his fault that someone stole his logo?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

pretty_petra says:

I think I know the designer who worked on the logo for Logomade. I doubt he copied it. I don't know...this smells like spring jealousy to me.

Guru Dan, close the session *LOL*.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Scott Cropper [deleted] says:

@midster05 - "Copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created in fixed form. The copyright in the work of authorship immediately becomes the property of the author who created the work. Only the author or those deriving their rights through the author can rightfully claim copyright." In other words, all you have to do is create something original and it belongs to you without having to file anything or pay anything.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

pretty_petra says:

Why should I believe Mr. Guru was the first one creating the logo? I don't see nothing original about the brackets neither. I bet the main shape was already used by plenty of other designers who could claim they were the first using it.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Chim Chim    says:

First off... there is a flaw in Flickr's system that allows people to open an account for the sole purpose of supporting an argument in someone's comments. They should make it a requirement to have a minimum number of photos posted before an account is allowed to leave comments.
"Mr. Guru" as you call him is a highly respected designer who's schedule is full of speaking engagements and who's portfolio is packed full of good, original design. He is trusted among his peers and has something that LogoMerde obviously doesn't... integrity. This isn't just some guy who started a blog and slapped a bracket-box logo on his site. There are plenty of people here, and many many more that have not commented, that will vouch for him.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Chim Chim    says:

I also like the familiar use of double negatives in pretty_petra's comment.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

ledo_bridgeportwv says:

This is such a bull***t! Dan, I saw similar bracket composition you both used long time ago. Be more creative next time.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

Kitty Loves Japan    says:

wow, three people sign up today just to lambast Dan over an issue they obviously have no expertise in. Well done people.

Dan, totally up to you what steps you decide to take here, either sigh and move on, or fight them in court.

All I know is you will have the backing of the entire design community behind you.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

röcketman says:

graphics2code says: "Paul, do you have any idea how tight this community is? Then to come back with the typical "it wasn't me" response. : Damn Straight!

Vireal says: "I never heard of simplebits, to say the truth." - You're fricken Kidding me! I am parading around in shock! You are a total n00b!

tanjatiziana says: *sniff sniff*
Someone's pants are on fire.
*cough vilord cough*

Listen, Mr Vilords you'd better get your act together before it's too late! Not to sound cliche, but have you any idea what you're doing!?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

ledo_bridgeportwv says:

I am not supporting LogoMaid nor Dan. I am just saying the bracket composition is nothing original.
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

röcketman says:

@ledo_bridgeportwv : It uniquely identifies Dan's Work, keyword being uniquely.

Hey "Vilord", I read that book you ripped off yesterday: "How to lie through your teeth"
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )

ledo_bridgeportwv says:

made in space: Is there something more between you guys we do not know about? ;) or just brownnosing?
Posted 28 months ago. ( permalink )