Quote from: bitcoinarchitecture on September 08, 2016, 08:46:28 AM

I have to agree with opinions on the forum.

Everyone here is trying to prevent you from big law suits, you should be happy with such honesty.

Bull vs Bear is not a new concept, but the design must be original.

I sculpt all my artpieces from scratch.

As said the design it is a copy of the Stifel statue.

Cut your losses, learn from this experience, start from scratch and create a new coin, the actual mint of the coin looks great.

One more advise, don't call your potential customers haters for being honest, it's bad for business.

Good luck, if you need some design help let me know!

Hi there just because the bull and the bear are in similar positions it inst actually trying to reproduce the sculpture in the slightest so it is not in breach of any coyright laws this I am absolutely sure of.

Haters I termed the people who have since removed comments and I tried to speak with privately so as to not make public my leaked designs. One however did take action which I appreciate.

But now I have an influx of abuse which is interesting to say the least. I am very sure none of you would say this to me in person so I shouldn't really take it as Defamation should I? Its just people angry at me for some reason.

Quote from: smoothie on September 07, 2016, 05:02:55 PM

Quote from: TheCryptoMint on September 07, 2016, 03:31:16 PM

Quote from: smoothie on September 03, 2016, 10:56:54 PM

Was it ever revealed who was reviewing the coins before public release?

Unoriginality is not the way to go.

You baited me back with this and I attached the original artwork 'flipped' just to show its nothing like it. As for the whole concept sure I got inspired from bitcoinarchitecture but this is a coin which has been made for people as a more interesting way to invest in bitcoin. His was a work of art. So how I stole anything is completely beyond me. I even offered to give the person involved a free coin so he can see how art can turn into a coin and to say thank you for the inspiration.

Anyhow we have decided to clear up the 'bulls' head issue. This has been wiped off everything and replaced by something incredible. Actually this is even better. What we have replaced it with is also copyrighted and we have permission to use it for a fee.

Thank you tremendously for all the haters anyway I do appreciate it. There will be a few people ignored during sales and I am sure you know who you are. There are certain ways to speak to people whether in life or online which are considered disrespectful and all those who fell into that category will unfortunately will be ignored.

smoothie I feel like giving you a free coin for baiting me back to this. We were simply going to carry on with the new design which is going to be even more grand but because of you this coin is back on the menu. Time wise both coins will be released 1st or 2nd week in November. Only a few will be sold on this forum as we have buyers willing to buy already and also want to attempt to target different markets in order to bring more appreciation to bitcoin.

Thanks for taking the time to read and I wont answer any more questions until coin sales have started.

To be clear I was talking about the usage of the Chicago Bulls logo which from what I gather is a direct copy of the original art. Am I mistaken on this presumption?

Also I don't believe giving constructive criticism is "hating". Then again I can only speak for myself and what I have said thus far.

Speaking from my own experience in making coins, I've always tried to keep to originality. All my art is custom art (with the exception of the simplistic LTC logo I used on my LTC coins which was open to community usage).

I know you said the artwork is not like BitcoinArchitecture's but is it a copy of the STIFEL image you posted?

Your first coin the litecoin I have seen and is a great design and concept with out a doubt. But if you compare side to side then some elements of the design were similar to other coins on the market at the time. I really don't see how it could be considered more original to what I have produced (apart from the mishap with the Chicago Bulls - this was completely an oversight and fail on my side personally - however not just myself gave it the all clear). The coin is fully original and within any law of copyright infringement. I am in no way trying to replicate the sculpture in the slightest and that is obvious. A sculpture is a sculpture and this is and embossed coin from a sketch that has animals in a similar position. You cant claim copyright infringement unless I was trying replicate it. Look at the paintings for sale which have the Eiffel tower here http://fineartamerica.com/art/paintings/eiffel+tower for an example. I have been involved in artwork my whole life I do know these things.

Quote from: defcon23 on September 08, 2016, 09:11:50 AM

there's something i dont really understand , concerning chicago bulls logo ... after few quick researchs, it seem a bit obscur , about the copyright & or creative commons licence registration on this artwork.. the strange part is: "aparently" there's no official registration from chicago bulls, and google seems perturbated too on this point....

any explainations ?

edit: this seem confirmed too.. http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/hledej.php?x=0&y=0&hleda=chicago+bull

Thank you for this it is indeed interesting and I will have to investigate further to see how they worked their way around using part of the logo which we did.