Legendary skills statuses are not made equal ??

[maroite]

Let me sum it up to see if I understood it right....

So my point and concerns over the way Legendary skills are dealt with in the game is valid and yet, nothing can be done for lack of resources so instead of a radical and comprehensive solution some patching work is done from time to time ???

If I understood it right then the only hope is that in the future more resources are added to the game or this issue is made a higher priority so that it is finally addressed in the comprehensive and complete way it would require ?

Stop using big words when you're just beating around the bush!

You haven't listed anything about how one skill isn't effective at 120. Or listed one skill that is not worth taking to 120.

I think you're substituting players choice with effectiveness. almost all 120 skills are very effective at 120.

Its the players CHOICE to not go to 120 in a skill because they with to spend the points someplace else due to their personal build desires.

 

[Smokin]

Just as one of several examples possible, a scribe realistically wanting to make good Scrapper's NEEDS 120 magery..........

So much for 120 skill level not felt as needed.......

I totally agree with that choice of comeback, but if you read what I said again, you would see that the Devs said we would not need, and now you are asking for them to make it so we do NEED them. Go back and read what I said about that too.

 

[Tina Small]

What I am trying to say is that if those skills now offering crappy bonuses at 120 will be pumped up, this will get players have to make choices over how many skills they can afford to 120.

Popps, people already do this today! Every skill that goes to 120 has some kind of advantage for taking it to 120, even if the advantage is "just" never failing at using the skill. In your mind, I guess that type of an advantage just isn't good enough??

Perhaps it would make more sense for some skills that now go to 120 to have their cap lowered to 100?

 

[Maplestone]

Either all skills should offer a significant bonus over lower levels at 120 or none should.

I think you're obsessing over a needless consistency.

Even if you sat down and attempted to create a checklist of benefits to each skill at 120, you're going to find people who shrug and ignore the top end ability. Similarly if you attempt to remove all bonuses for 120, you'll find that some are still more useful than others.

You seem to be missing the fundamental secret to enjoying the game: need what you have and don't need what you don't have.

 

[Farsight]

Right now I play a relatively small amount of time. You could call me a casual player (I actually post more than I play lately... I'm such a board-warrior).

My characters on my main shard include exactly 3 legendary skills. I have a character which is legendary archer and another character which has legendary spellweaving (actually spellweaving is 119.2 last I checked) and wrestling. I only have those skills to legendary because I happened to find the scrolls by doing the Felucca spawns myself (To be fair, I received a lot more 120 scrolls in my time than 3, but I either used them and didn't train the skill or I sold/gave them away).

And now you tell me that my time in UO is less rich because I don't have all those other skills up to legendary?

Thanks for letting me know I'm playing the game wrong.
/sarcasm

 

[Taylor]

Pops, if they made it equally important to raise every skill to legendary, you would complain about not having a high enough skill cap to fit the skills you desire, or about it being too difficult to raise certain skills to legendary, or about certain templates being stronger than others. Your disappointment with this game seems endless. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever seen you post about something you like about the game. I feel genuine remorse for your situation.

If you are dissatisfied so many aspects of the game, perhaps a different game would suit you better?

 

[jfkeach]

Skills at legendary levels are better than at levels of, say, 80. However, due to skill point constrains, people tend to choose carefully how they distribute points, putting more points toward skills that are more important.

Chivalry is rarely raised above 75. Most chivalry spells work at around 75. Holy Light still fails a lot, though. If people had the skill points to invest in chivalry, everyone would bring the skill to 120, to ensure 100% successful casting of holy light. However, when forced to choose between 120 chivalry and 120 swordsmanship, players will be inclined to invest more points in swordsmanship.

Skill caps = a game of give and take. This is game mechanics are balanced. Luckily, real life works the same way - no one is good at all skills and hobbies. Better get used to the idea.

On any char I have Chiv on, I have at least GM. My Tamer pally archer is 120, my fencer is 120. Amount healed is dependent on skill and karma. So I max both out. And I love being able to dispel Revs every time.

 

[Taylor]

Skills at legendary levels are better than at levels of, say, 80. However, due to skill point constrains, people tend to choose carefully how they distribute points, putting more points toward skills that are more important.

Chivalry is rarely raised above 75. Most chivalry spells work at around 75. Holy Light still fails a lot, though. If people had the skill points to invest in chivalry, everyone would bring the skill to 120, to ensure 100% successful casting of holy light. However, when forced to choose between 120 chivalry and 120 swordsmanship, players will be inclined to invest more points in swordsmanship.

Skill caps = a game of give and take. This is game mechanics are balanced. Luckily, real life works the same way - no one is good at all skills and hobbies. Better get used to the idea.

On any char I have Chiv on, I have at least GM. My Tamer pally archer is 120, my fencer is 120. Amount healed is dependent on skill and karma. So I max both out. And I love being able to dispel Revs every time.

Probably why I said, "chivalry is rarely raised above 75."

 

[Saunders]

Skills at legendary levels are better than at levels of, say, 80. However, due to skill point constrains, people tend to choose carefully how they distribute points, putting more points toward skills that are more important.

Chivalry is rarely raised above 75. Most chivalry spells work at around 75. Holy Light still fails a lot, though. If people had the skill points to invest in chivalry, everyone would bring the skill to 120, to ensure 100% successful casting of holy light. However, when forced to choose between 120 chivalry and 120 swordsmanship, players will be inclined to invest more points in swordsmanship.

Skill caps = a game of give and take. This is game mechanics are balanced. Luckily, real life works the same way - no one is good at all skills and hobbies. Better get used to the idea.

On any char I have Chiv on, I have at least GM. My Tamer pally archer is 120, my fencer is 120. Amount healed is dependent on skill and karma. So I max both out. And I love being able to dispel Revs every time.

Probably why I said, "chivalry is rarely raised above 75."

In this way, tho maybe not in others, chivalry is well designed. It is useful at 75, at 80, and apparently at 120, but in ways that suit different players or characters.
If a skill has to be at 120 to be useful, then that would be a badly designed skill.

 

[Connor_Graham]

Taming - no way to control high level pets without it and lore at 120 (effectively)

This is wrong. Lore never needs to go over 110 for full control of any pet in game, including GD's and dread mares.

 

[Taylor]

Taming - no way to control high level pets without it and lore at 120 (effectively)

This is wrong. Lore never needs to go over 110 for full control of any pet in game, including GD's and dread mares.

Correct. Even dreads and fire steeds can be 99.9% controlled (i.e., max control property) at 110 taming/lore.

 

[Cogniac]

Posting in epic troll thread.

 

[popps]

skill that is not worth taking to 120.

I am not saying there are skills not worth taking to 120, all skills are worth taking to 120. The point is, they are not "equally" worth taking to 120....

Some skills, as players' experience has shown, are "more" worth taking to 120 and, infact, players would not settle for 119 on "some" skills and go for 120, no doubt, but have no problem settling for even as low as 70-80 for some other skills.
Meaning, that Legendary status ain't beneficial alike among the skills....

I think you're substituting players choice with effectiveness. almost all 120 skills are very effective at 120.

They are more effective than at lower levels, certainly, but their "boost: at 120 is NOT equally shared among the skills. Some boost "more" than other skills and this discrimination is what I disagree with....

 

[Surgeries]

Popps is right on with this one. Look, he just became a legendary complainer, and i can't tell the diffference since he was at around 60 skill.

Oh Criminy...this made me LOL!!!

Good Lord!! That was funny!!

 

[Thangorodrim]

I am not saying there are skills not worth taking to 120, all skills are worth taking to 120. The point is, they are not "equally" worth taking to 120....

You are utterly incorrigible.

How *exactly* do you plan to quantify this equality, popps, and then how will you rectify it?

 

[popps]

Perhaps it would make more sense for some skills that now go to 120 to have their cap lowered to 100?

That would be a good proposition that found me in agreement.

Those skills now trainable to 120 but which yet do not offer a bonus comparable to other skills also trainable to 120 should have their CAP lowered to 100 and be removed of their 120 legendary trainable capability.

Or, to avoid players who trained them already to 120 to complain, perhaps an also valid alternative could be making their 120 status be more rewarding like it is for other skills...

 

[popps]

You are utterly incorrigible.

How *exactly* do you plan to quantify this equality, popps, and then how will you rectify it?

When I hear players say, without an inch of a doubt that YES, swords, fencing or macing MUST be taken all the way to 120 but hey, chivalry (just an example, mind you...) can well stay as low as 70 or 80 that alone shows this inequality to me.

Clearly to me, either the 120 bonus for swords/fencing/mace is too good or that for 120 chivalry is too crappy or players would never be able to make such a clear cut choice without much thinking over it.......

Fine tuning is the key to balancing the bonuses among skills and needs be done over time.

Bonuses should be such that are added and then are adjusted a little at a time over time seeing how players react to them and until the right balance is reached.

When players start posting about how they are battled and unsure on which skills to 120 because ALL of them are juicy to be 120ed, well, THAT will show that the final right balancing has been reached......

Seeing players without an inch of a doubt about which skills to 120 and which not is to me a sign that legendary skills are NOT equalized good enough in the bonuses they offer.

 

[popps]

I totally agree with that choice of comeback, but if you read what I said again, you would see that the Devs said we would not need, and now you are asking for them to make it so we do NEED them. Go back and read what I said about that too.

I did not say need them, I said have all skills trainable to 120 offer bonuses at Legendary that are equally desirable.

Now, instead, some skills offer a higher advantage at 120 over others and, therefore, are prioritized by players over other skills.

That does not mean one had to 120 them but if they wanted to, they should get the same (comparable) boost from any and all skills trainable to 120.

 

[Thangorodrim]

When I hear players say, without an inch of a doubt that YES, swords, fencing or macing MUST be taken all the way to 120 but hey, chivalry (just an example, mind you...) can well stay as low as 70 or 80 that alone shows this inequality to me.

Clearly to me, either the 120 bonus for swords/fencing/mace is too good or that for 120 chivalry is too crappy or players would never be able to make such a clear cut choice without much thinking over it.......

Fine tuning is the key to balancing the bonuses among skills and needs be done over time.

Bonuses should be such that are added and then are adjusted a little at a time over time seeing how players react to them and until the right balance is reached.

When players start posting about how they are battled and unsure on which skills to 120 because ALL of them are juicy to be 120ed, well, THAT will show that the final right balancing has been reached......

Seeing players without an inch of a doubt about which skills to 120 and which not is to me a sign that legendary skills are NOT equalized good enough in the bonuses they offer.

Do you actually play UO?

If your goofy idea were actually implemented there would be no gain to anyone whatsoever and a tremendous reduction in template diversity.

There is no skill that *has* to be taken to 120 for any template, which is the way it should be.

 

[Tina Small]

Popps, here's a list of the skills that only go to 100 and the skill titles that go with them:

• Alchemist - Alchemy
• Warrior - Arms Lore
• Beggar - Begging
• Bowyer - Bowcraft/Fletching
• Ranger - Camping
• Carpenter - Carpentry
• Cartographer - Cartography
• Chef - Cooking
• Scout - Detect Hidden
• Fisherman - Fishing
• Detective - Forensic Evaluation
• Shepherd - Herding
• Rogue - Hiding
• Scribe - Inscription
• Merchant - Item ID
• Rogue - Lockpicking
• Lumberjack - Lumberjacking
• Miner - Mining
• Assassin - Poisoning
• Rogue - Remove Trap
• Pickpocket - Snooping
• Chef - Taste ID
• Tinker - Tinkering
• Ranger - Tracking

And here is a list of the skills that can be maxed out at 120 and their relevant skill titles:

• Healer - Anatomy
• Ranger - Animal Lore
• Tamer - Animal Taming
• Archer - Archery
• Smith - Blacksmithy
• Samurai - Bushido
• Paladin - Chivalry
• Bard - Discordance
• Scholar - Evaluating Intelligence
• Fencer - Fencing
• Stoic - Focus
• Healer - Healing
• Artificer - Imbuing
• Armsman - Mace Fighting
• Mage - Magery
• Stoic - Meditation
• Bard - Musicianship
• Mystic - Mysticism
• Necromancer - Necromancy
• Ninja - Ninjitsu
• Warrior - Parrying
• Bard - Peacemaking
• Bard - Provocation
• Mage - Resisting Spells
• Arcanist - Spellweaving
• Medium - Spirit Speak
• Pickpocket - Stealing
• Rogue - Stealth
• Swordsman - Swordsmanship
• Warrior - Tactics
• Tailor - Tailoring
• Bladeweaver - Throwing
• Veterinarian - Veterinary
• Wrestler - Wrestling

After reading these lists, is there any thought in particular that jumps out at you and smacks you in the face, just by virtue of the fact that 41% of the skills in UO do not go above 100?

Something, perhaps, like:

Some skills in UO are actually more important or used more often in the game than others.

Or perhaps:

UO skills are not created or treated equally.

Or even perhaps:

Some skills are primary skills and others are supporting skills.

Or maybe:

The designers of the game couldn't come up with sufficient relevant content to make every skill trainable to 120.

Or possibly:

The designers of the game assumed not everyone would be satisfied with cookie cutter 6x120 skill templates and would enjoy mixing and matching skills.

And last but not least:

You don't necessarily have to invest more than 100 points in a skill for it to be very useful within a well-designed template.

I also have two questions for you about skills in general:

Have you ever wondered why practically every skill is pretty darn useful by the time you've got at least 80-85 points invested in it? How much incentive would players have to build characters if they were basically useless until they had achieved GM level in all skills in their template that max out at 120? (In other words, if they had to hit 83.3% of the max total skill points in the skill, 100/120?) Wasn't a promise made that you wouldn't have to go to 120 to still be effective?

Do you think there's any possibility at all that when the developers decided which skills would have their caps raised to 120, they understood some of those skills weren't actually that much more useful at 120 than at 100 but some players would invest the extra points in them just to satisfy their vanity at wearing a title such as "Legendary Paladin," "Legendary Medium," "Legendary Healer," or "Legendary Rogue"?

 

[Old Man of UO]

 

[LordDrago]

Rather than having the devs work on "balancing" Legendary skills, i would much rather have them focus some energy on making other skills more useful.

I always thought camping could have some cool benefits at higher levels:

what if a GM camper could create a "siege camp" in PvP. the camps couldbe targeted and damaged, but offer friendlies in the area a healing benefit. As the camp is damaged, the healing benefit is lowered until the camp is destroyed. Huge field battles with sides trying to destroy the others camp while in "enemy" territory. maybe even offer some sort of summon to defend the camp that works on a timer (when do you commit these extra troops - too soon and if the battle lasts longer, you may not have the defense later - too late and, well, you lose).

 

[popps]

Do you actually play UO?

If your goofy idea were actually implemented there would be no gain to anyone whatsoever and a tremendous reduction in template diversity.

There is no skill that *has* to be taken to 120 for any template, which is the way it should be.

I am depressed by my inhability to make myself understood........ go figure....

I never ever said that people "had to" take skills to 120.

I said that "if" people made a choice to use a given skill, trainable to 120, then for any and all skills trainable to 120 the benefits should be comparable when reaching Legendary status.

Not as it is now that for some skills getting to 120 is much better than for others....

This is not at all having to take a skill to 120 but if one does do it, then the prize should be comparable, just alike, for all skills trainable to Legendary.

 

[lucefuge]

Like, for example, for stealthing that is good enough at 80 as it may be at 120 ??

Some skills seem to have too much a marginal benefit at 120 to what they offer at lower levels and this, is not correct, IMHO.

C'mon...........

80 stealth is good for medable armor

trying stealthing with all platemail non med armor

 

[Thangorodrim]

I am depressed by my inhability to make myself understood........ go figure....

Consider changing nutrition and lifestyle. Get moderate exercise, consume low gi carbs as well as plenty of protein and healthy fats. See a physician to get an analysis of your folate/homocysteine and b12 status.

I never ever said that people "had to" take skills to 120.

I said that "if" people made a choice to use a given skill, trainable to 120, then for any and all skills trainable to 120 the benefits should be comparable when reaching Legendary status.

The skills are different, though, popps. Its not that you cannot express your idea, its that its a bad idea.

How is LG eval going to compare to LG archery? It can't because they are not the same thing. LG eval to LG anatomy? Should anatomy di be 30%? LG spirit speak to LG vet? GM camping to GM fletch?

LG archery is comparable to LG swords because the skills are comparable.

Tell me exactly how the benefits could be made comparable when the skills are not comparable. Following along here?

The importance of skills and their optimal levels is determined on a template by template basis by the player. Like market value, the benefits are not universal but determined by each individuals criteria. I know people who have LG chiv... and they find it extremely beneficial *for their template* regardless of the fact that sampires make do at 65-75 (or whatever).

You have been shifting goalposts throughout this thread because, of course, you are a troll. However your original stipulations of there being significant difference between 80 and 120 is already true in the vast majority of cases.

What you are pancakes about is one of UO's strengths, not a weakness.

Go play.

 

[Thangorodrim]

IHBT.

 

[Viper09]

Who wants to start a guessing game on popps next "debate" thread?

 

[popps]

Tell me exactly how the benefits could be made comparable when the skills are not comparable. Following along here?

How I would proceed ?

I would get the skills trainable to 120 yet not used by players to their fullest and figure out "why" players stop them below 120.

Then I would look at how often this happens. That is, how many players on average get those same skills and use them "below" Legendary. Of course, in relation to other skills which, instead, are indeed used up to their fullest at 120 level.

At that point, when I see that enough players use those same skills at levels below Legendary I know the game has a problem with those skills.

That is, they are NOT appealing enough for players to 120 them OR, they are too good at lower levels to make players want to 120 them.

Therefore, once I pin point those skills I would do either of the following :

A)
Make those skills more appealing when 120ied so as to have more players be more willing to bring them all the way to legendary

OR (as an alternative option)

B)
Make these same skills LESS appealing at lower levels so that more players may be willing to take them all the way to Legendary

What you are pancakes about is one of UO's strengths, not a weakness..

I disagree with the whole sandbox thing.

A roleplaying game should rely on roles that players play picking those that they prefer to play, not playing a mixed up salad of skills that puts together skills which should not be mixable in the first place like a Paladin and a Necromancer for example on the same one template ??

Gimme a break........

 

[Tina Small]

I disagree with the whole sandbox thing.

A roleplaying game should rely on roles that players play picking those that they prefer to play, not playing a mixed up salad of skills that puts together skills which should not be mixable in the first place.....

*Places a bookmark here for future reference.*

 

[Lord Gareth]

popps needs a job. Ive been reading some of his posts and certain parts of most are good. I'm thinking Stratics Content feedback position.

 

[popps]

*Places a bookmark here for future reference.*

I started playing a game that was online, multiplayer AND a role playing game....

A game where a crafter was a crafter, a Mage a mage, a fighter a fighter and a Bard was a bard....

SKILLs were paramount and people played their preferred roles.......

Then all this items madness came, skills mixed up in all salads possible and the game I used to play went into chaos.....

I want the Ultima Online I used to play back !!

 

[Maplestone]

A roleplaying game should rely on roles that players play picking those that they prefer to play, not playing a mixed up salad of skills that puts together skills which should not be mixable in the first place like a Paladin and a Necromancer for example on the same one template ??

um ... you and I seem to have very different opinions of what a roleplaying game is.

 

[popps]

um ... you and I seem to have very different opinions of what a roleplaying game is.

So, for a Roleplaying game where players are supposed to pick a role and stick with it and play it withing the virtual world it should be fine (for example) that on the same one template a goodly aligned Paladin coexists with an evil aligned Necromancer ??

No way, I can never see that (and a lot more) as fine in what I consider fit for a roleplaying game.

 

[Old Man of UO]

...

I disagree with the whole sandbox thing.

A roleplaying game should rely on roles that players play picking those that they prefer to play, not playing a mixed up salad of skills that puts together skills which should not be mixable in the first place like a Paladin and a Necromancer for example on the same one template ??

Gimme a break........

You have absolutely no clue what a Sandbox game is, do you? UO is a sandbox game by its very design.

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

OH...cant forget this...

 

[Tina Small]

I started playing a game that was online, multiplayer AND a role playing game....

A game where a crafter was a crafter, a Mage a mage, a fighter a fighter and a Bard was a bard....

SKILLs were paramount and people played their preferred roles.......

Then all this items madness came, skills mixed up in all salads possible and the game I used to play went into chaos.....

I want the Ultima Online I used to play back !!

Please answer this honestly: If nothing had ever changed with regard to skills and skill caps and no items with properties had been added, would YOU still be playing today characters with the exact same combination of skills as you originally had? Do you think you would have taken any breaks in the interim, and if yes, why? What, if anything, would you be doing differently in UO than you did when you began playing?

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

So, for a Roleplaying game where players are supposed to pick a role and stick with it and play it withing the virtual world it should be fine (for example) that on the same one template a goodly aligned Paladin coexists with an evil aligned Necromancer ??

No way, I can never see that (and a lot more) as fine in what I consider fit for a roleplaying game.

and then?

 

[maroite]

So, for a Roleplaying game where players are supposed to pick a role and stick with it and play it withing the virtual world it should be fine (for example) that on the same one template a goodly aligned Paladin coexists with an evil aligned Necromancer ??

No way, I can never see that (and a lot more) as fine in what I consider fit for a roleplaying game.

People can roleplay how they want, just because you may or may not like it doesn't make it wrong. They pay for the game, its their choice.

If people want to roleplay a necro paladin, then they can. If they knew about how Chiv works, they probably wouldn't though. As Chiv derives a lot of its power from the karma of the char using it. Low karma, Chiv isn't too good. High KArma, Chiv is pretty nice.

Necro spells make you lose Karma so they don't exactly work hand in hand. Also, with the change to vampire form, putting 90 points into Necro to keep vampire form isn't always worth it to many builds. Squeezing in 35 points before was more.

 

[maroite]

popps needs a job. Ive been reading some of his posts and certain parts of most are good. I'm thinking Stratics Content feedback position.

No offense but using large words to beat around the bush and avoid your own topic when asked questions about it does NOT make a good post.

I am not saying there are skills not worth taking to 120, all skills are worth taking to 120. The point is, they are not "equally" worth taking to 120....

Some skills, as players' experience has shown, are "more" worth taking to 120 and, infact, players would not settle for 119 on "some" skills and go for 120, no doubt, but have no problem settling for even as low as 70-80 for some other skills.
Meaning, that Legendary status ain't beneficial alike among the skills....



They are more effective than at lower levels, certainly, but their "boost: at 120 is NOT equally shared among the skills. Some boost "more" than other skills and this discrimination is what I disagree with....

Thats because some skills are considered "main skill" and some are complimentary skills.

Complimentary skill examples are anatomy, eval int, tactics, armor lore, animal lore and spirit speak.

These skills can be removed from the game, and the MAIN skills can be changed to just have the skills bonuses tied in, but then you would have people running around with animal taming, swords, bows, magery, and necromancy, and say myst all at 120. People would be super builds.

Weapon skills, magic skills, crafting skills, are considered main skills imho.

 

[Jirel of Joiry]

Um, Old Man you do know your cute little picture borders on copyright infringment?

That's a WD-40 can and WD-40, its logos and can design are copyright by WD-40 Company located in San Deigo, CA.

Before you smart off at me, I know this because the company I work for is a LICENSED DISTRIBUTOR of WD-40.

Just sayin is all. Wouldn't want anyone going and getting into trouble.

 

[Maplestone]

So, for a Roleplaying game where players are supposed to pick a role and stick with it and play it withing the virtual world it should be fine (for example) that on the same one template a goodly aligned Paladin coexists with an evil aligned Necromancer ??

There are so many things wrong with this post I don't know where to begin.

The player defines what the roles are.

The player does not have to "stick" to anything ... the character has a journey, one that may end up far from where they began (my first blacksmith is named "Salthook" because I originally created him to be a fisherman, but the demands of his side job repairing my warrior's armor and weapon eventually grew to dominate his career).

My necromancer has glorious karma. He is by no means evil. He's primarily an exorcist, laying to rest the troubled spirits of Magincia. When he does, on rare occassions, invoke other powers, he does so weighing heavily whether the ends justify the means.

As for claiming necromancy and chivalry should never be comined, I would point out that the "death knight" is such an archetype of fantasy that a certain other MMO game has created a whole class for combining those two powers.

 

[maroite]

Um, Old Man you do know your cute little pic ture borders on copyright infringment?

That's a WD-40 can and WD-40, its logos and can design are copyright by WD-40 Company located in San Deigo, CA.

Before you smart off at me, I know this because the company I work for is a LICENSED DISTRIBUTOR of WD-40.

Just sayin is all. Wouldn't want anyone going and getting into trouble.

You should continue working for your company and leave law to the lawyers, because you obviously don't know much about copyrights.

 

[Viper09]

You should continue working for your company and leave law to the lawyers, because you obviously don't know much about copyrights.

Aww, you beat me to it

 

[Jirel of Joiry]

You should continue working for your company and leave law to the lawyers, because you obviously don't know much about copyrights.

Aww, you beat me to it

Um, Old Man you do know your cute little pic ture borders on copyright infringment?

That's a WD-40 can and WD-40, its logos and can design are copyright by WD-40 Company located in San Deigo, CA.

Before you smart off at me, I know this because the company I work for is a LICENSED DISTRIBUTOR of WD-40.

Just sayin is all. Wouldn't want anyone going and getting into trouble.

You should continue working for your company and leave law to the lawyers, because you obviously don't know much about copyrights.

I'll remind both of you that you said that when you get busted by the RIAA for downloading "Free" MP3s. I'm sure you don't think they're copyrighted either.

BTW, Might I direct you to http://www.wd40.comwhich has the following info

Copyright. All materials on the Web Sites and used in the Services, including without limitation, the WD-40 logo, designs, text, graphics, information, data, images, audio, video, applications, software, metadata, compilations, graphical user interfaces, other files, and the selection, arrangement and organization thereof are either owned by WD-40 Company or are the property of WD-40 Company's suppliers or licensors. No Web Sites' content may be modified, copied, distributed, framed, reproduced, republished, downloaded, scraped, displayed, posted, transmitted, or sold in any form or by any means, in whole or in part, without our prior written permission, except that the foregoing does not apply to your own user content (as described above in the "Your Content" section) that you legally post on the Web Sites. Provided that you are eligible to use the Web Sites, you are granted a limited license to access and use the Web Sites and the Services and to download or print a copy of any portion of the Web Sites' content to which you have properly gained access solely for your personal, non-commercial use, provided that you do not alter or delete any trademark, copyright, or other proprietary notices. Except for your own user content, you may not upload or republish our Web Sites' content on any Internet, Intranet or Extranet site or use the information in any other database or compilation, and any other use of our Web Sites' content is strictly prohibited. Your license is subject to this Agreement and does not permit use of any data mining, robots, scraping or similar data gathering or extraction methods. Any use of the Web Sites or the Services beyond the scope of the license granted above is prohibited. Copyright © 2008-2009 WD-40 Company. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

b. Trademarks. WD-40, the WD-40 logo, and the other WD-40 Company product names, tag lines, logos, page headers, custom graphics, button icons, and scripts shown on the Web Sites are trademarks or trade dress of WD-40 Company. Any use by you of such trademarks and trade dress is for the sole benefit of WD-40 Company and all goodwill generated by such use will inure to WD-40 Company. If you refer to WD-40 Company's trademarks or logos, you must include appropriate attribution to WD-40 Company. All other trademarks, trade names and the like that appear on the Web Sites or in the Services are the property of their respective owners. You may not use (including as part of a domain name) any of these trademarks, trade dress, or trade names without express permission.

Any other smart remarks? I didn't think so....Back in your caves TROLLS.

 

[maroite]

First off, you come to a thread about legendary skills, make no comments about the original topic, claim that someone is breaking copyright laws, and then dare to call others trolls?...

Secondly, you have no clue how law works. You copy and pasted copyright laws, congratulations. I think you should call WD-40 and point them at this post and say that the im age is breaking copyright laws and listen to them laugh at you.

If you see someone irl taking a vi deo or pi cture of someone carrying a WD-40 can do you run up to them and tell them to stop because they're breaking copyright laws? Do you police myspace and facebook and send messages to every person who has a pi cture with some product in it that is breaking copyright laws?

Lastly, I would LOVE to read about how WD-40 pressed charges against a graphic, which only has faint similarities to their product, is not used for the promotion or sale of a competitors product, and in no way at all has anything to do with WD-40.

I love how people read a law, and automatically as sume they can take the BAR. Although I must admit, I shouldn't have expected much from you.


PS - The RIAA has a legit reason to go after people because people are distributing their SONGS for free. Not im ages that bare simularities.

 

[Maplestone]

Any other smart remarks?

 

[Jirel of Joiry]

First off, you come to a thread about legendary skills, make no comments about the original topic, claim that someone is breaking copyright laws, and then dare to call others trolls?...

Secondly, you have no clue how law works. You copy and pasted copyright laws, congratulations. I think you should call WD-40 and point them at this post and say that the im age is breaking copyright laws and listen to them laugh at you.

If you see someone irl taking a vi deo or pi cture of someone carrying a WD-40 can do you run up to them and tell them to stop because they're breaking copyright laws? Do you police myspace and facebook and send messages to every person who has a pi cture with some product in it that is breaking copyright laws?

Lastly, I would LOVE to read about how WD-40 pressed charges against a graphic, which only has faint similarities to their product, is not used for the promotion or sale of a competitors product, and in no way at all has anything to do with WD-40.

I love how people read a law, and automatically as sume they can take the BAR. Although I must admit, I shouldn't have expected much from you.


PS - The RIAA has a legit reason to go after people because people are distributing their SONGS for free. Not im ages that bare simularities.

Congratulations!! You just won Dumbarse of Year with that whole statement!!


Lets compare pitures shall we?

Said picture:



Now a WD-40 can

hmmmm, a visually impaired person could see its a ALTERED WD-40 can.

BTW, I never said I was gonna tell anyone. Geez, Hooked On Phonics didn't work for you did it?

 

[Viper09]

Any other smart remarks? I didn't think so....Back in your caves TROLLS.

Instead of quoting over such a ridiculous subject, I shall just say read this book:

Communications Law: Liberties, Restraints, and the Modern Media
By John D. Zelenzy

For more fun reading:
Cases in Communications Law
Same author.

 

[Jirel of Joiry]

Instead of quoting over such a ridiculous subject, I shall just say read this book:

Communications Law: Liberties, Restraints, and the Modern Media
By John D. Zelenzy

For more fun reading:
Cases in Communications Law
Same author.

Thank you! Finally an intelligent post! I'll definatly check those out. ty

BTW, if you ever have insomina I recommend Oklahoma State Supreme Court proceedings ..LOL if you get passed all the motions and counter motions without falling asleep face down on keyboard...You are waaaaay ahead of me.