response to info_warfare
>>you
..me
>>Are you kidding? First, if these people had the skill they wouldn't be here asking how to do a web site.
.. i wasnt commenting on the apparent lack of html coding skill of the person/people asking for help. i was refining clarification on a boundary of what i consider "intellectual property" to be. apparently the full meaning of my point wasnt clear.
>>And I know plenty of people with all the best "web building" tools in the world that still do crappy web sites, so yes, it takes much more than just having the tools.
..i agree that it takes more than just "web builiding tools" to create a relevant work of art using a website as the means of expressing or presenting what ever the content is about, it takes skill to do something worthy of association with the term "intellectual property" (example: squarerootof-1, ie james tindall), however, i contend the "rightclick, steal, change, upload" method only applies to html code that does not include anything done with dreamweaver, flash, javascript, ect. yes, it takes an impressive intellect to display a command web publishing in general (including javascript, flash, ect.), and that is exactly my point. strait html, is too generic to be associated with intellectual property, especially since there are so many programs that let you design a websites without knowing html coding. sitting down, writing generic html code and expecting to be respected for it is like wanting respect for making it a point to cut hair ONLY with scissors, and NOT clippers.
>>But according to your backwards philosophy,
..whoa, someone sounds little uptight about html. is this meant to be insulting? if its not, then please forgive the progressively condecending tone that this reply takes on as it progresses.
>>I should then be able to just take your song that you've created and put it out there as my own (with slight modifications.) What's the differwence between that and taking someone's website that they created with their skills?
..if we are goign to discuss intellectual property thieft of web publishing in the context its metaphorical representation as intellectual property thieft of music, then the analogies should be apropriate...
by my "backwards philosophy", you could only take a house beat (you know which one im talking about; "boom tsk boom tsk boom tsk boom tsk") that house beat that is soooooo generic, that i LOOP 1573 times, you could take THAT, change it a little bit, and call it your own. that would be the proper analogy of taking html code that i can either have a program generate for me, or, if i happen to see a page that already has a basic html layout that i find apropriate, with the color scheme almost cool, the paragraph brakes all there, the "a href"s all already on the page, text centered...because that beat requires NO skill. it requires no creativity. its just a loop of a generic bass drum, generic snare, genereic hihat, in a generic pattern.
>>In other words, it is obviously not an easy thing to recreate a web site without some measure of skill, regardless of the tools you have,
..i would say its not and easy thing to recreat a website thats worth a damn with out some measure of skill regrdless of the tools you have.
>>so you shouldn't blantly steal someone else's site.
..i disagree.
>>I don't think there is anything wrong with looking at the code to see how they pulled off a particular technique, but to blantly steal a whole site!? Not cool.
.. on an ableton site, complaing about stealing code from someonelse's site, something that you yourself have compared to intellectual property theift of music? im going to HAVE to assume that you ONLY use your ableton's midi capability for synth melodies, or triggering loops and samples that youve recorded of yourself playing live instruments. hmmm.
not cool...
