The Creator's Legal Clinic: Advices and Explanations

The worst thing PayPal can do is say no. It’s worth asking. PayPal has helped me with issues older than that before.

Thanks. I've gone as far back on the transaction history for the installments as I could and reported every single one of them with a picture of the offending design to back up my case. I have also broken all contact with the artist (without even a mention of my intent, as I'm that p---ed off about the situation) and reported them to Discord for engaging in fraud.

As a side note, I don't normally post back-to-back (because rules), however this incident has raised questions about a logo design that was commissioned with the same "artist" and therefore warrants its own separate ping on the thread from where I'm concerned, as I literally just thought of this and need an immediate analysis of the matter in case I would require a complete redesign given the initial case of fraud.

Here's what I need to have checked:

EDIT: I should probably note that this one cost me $150USD (plus tax) which given the prior incident could potentially be overkill, and possibly just as fraudulent.

EDIT 2: I have also gone into the newsroom page for my website and delisted the announcement of its implementation as a precaution (although it will remain in use as an internal placeholder asset until a replacement can be identified).

EDIT 3: Just got done with the image search, which seems to be clear of potential trouble as I didn't see anything that may cause issues. Similarity verification is also coming back clean. However, I am still going to redesign the logo as a precaution (and also per my zero tolerance policy) since I no longer trust the artist.

It doesn’t cause any immediate pause for me, though it does look awfully simple for $150. However, I’m not seeing any super obvious red flags. That said, I would probably be hesitant to associate my projects with anyone who tries to pass off a melted EVA.

Which is exactly what I was thinking, as I have zero tolerance for this kind of thing (to the point where I will reject, redesign or otherwise replace any contributions made by an offending party, and for obvious reasons). I am also in the process of preparing to write a C&D on the matter and to order restitution as a condition of doing so.

EDIT: The notice has been sent, and I have indicated that noncompliance will result in a legal claim. Hopefully that will get their attention and put this s--- to rest.

EDIT 2: Okay, slight plot twist. They have claimed "past legal success" and have that they have never scammed anyone in an email message and are demanding that since everything was done to "satisfaction" (or at least it was until this came up) that they fulfilled their end and therefore I need to withdraw my claims, and they won't charge for a replacement. However, I still don't trust them and believe this is just them trying to "strong arm" me into the status quo. Basically, their response to my claims sounds kind of fishy.

EDIT 3: Here's the suspiciously worded email that I received:

The legal case has now been settled, and PayPal has processed the refunds. Sadly, I can no longer use anything from these commissions (so the logo will have to be redesigned, never mind the legal ramifications of keeping the errant mech in the asset package) and will be destroying everything by this evening. While I am disappointed that I have been cheated like this, I at least managed to recover everything that I paid. (Well, except for one transaction that was invoiced from the wrong account on their end - that I wasn't able to do anything with, as it had been removed from the system owing that someone (or something) thought it was sus. However, everything else has been successfully refunded.)

EDIT: I should state as a side note that the logo structure was actually my own idea (and not theirs), so as long as the base design is in the clear, then my own personal interpretation should probably be okay, even though I had to destroy the one that was created for me. As such, I kept the design largely unchanged in the updated version (which now uses the appearance of tails and cat ears as they are implemented for the characters) and changed only a minimal number of design elements to differentiate from what came before.

However, since what came back is from a tainted artist (who is now banned from being a client of mine) I would still like to make sure that the logo is safe to use even in my own interpretation. And for the purpose of record, here's the concept draft that I put together...



... as well as my own personal interpretation.



I'm sharing both of these out of my own volition even though the mockup was only ever meant for art reference and not for public consumption. (And as it has been said by other bright minds, sometimes keeping it simple is the better and easier way to do things.)

So earlier today, I decided that my logo was due for a refresh as I am abandoning a target platform and was thinking that there's an element of the design that (while my own idea) is kind of similar to what a certain tech company uses, and while the overall logo is nowhere near that of the design in question, I still want to be safe from a legal standpoint as I make this transition.

What I'm officially using now is the same as on my forum profile, but I want to move away from it owing to the fact that it takes design influence thereof (and obviously if there's too much influence, then I don't exactly want that.) Either way, here's the horizontal version of what I currently have to go with the vertical version that's on my profile:



So essentially speaking, in moving away from this, I want to keep elements that I feel are important but do so in a way that won't cut too close to a competitor. I want to keep the puzzle pieces as an element, although not as a 4x4 square owing to the nature of this matter (even though the colors are different). In other words, this is what I want to be proactive with the most with the new design.

(In case you're wondering, I don't have a C&D on file or anything else that would expedite such changes; rather, this is a preemptive decision as it relates to what I'm moving away from.)

Going further with the fact that I am changing my logo on the concern of coming too close from comparative standing with a portion of a competitor's mark, I was wondering if it would be possible to DMCA the Internet Archive so that the design which is being removed on the concern in question can be deleted from the Wayback Machine. Is there any precedent for that?

Well, it's been a while since my last legal conundrum (which for matters of circumstance have long since been settled elsewhere) but there's one thing I never did ask regarding music and licensing that just came up in an idea for a potential plot point. More specifically, it calls for the character in question to have a near miss from a cardiac incident from which the life support wires on his jet suit take note and trigger a guided landing; after being recovered from the landing site and being taken in for evaluation, he casually quotes Achy Breaky Heart in the following scene (though without the music or melody, for obvious reasons). I'm not sure if anything about this has been mentioned in prior conversations on the matter, but what gets me stuck in this instance is if it could potentially imply the melody's presence (and thereby trigger the requisite licensing issues even if it's not intended to convey anything other than the quotation).