Habbo background = rip!!

[Laurensh1]

About the "if you make anything that looks like Habbo or you use stuff from habbo on it, they own it" comment;

If a guy had a McDonald's "Ronald Mcdonald" character on his burger stand, that doesn't mean McDonald's then own the burger stand. The only right they have is to make him take the logo/character down from his stand and sue his ass for any profit he's made since using it.

Simply, that's something else... If you post it, add Habbo stuff in it, they own it.

[AgnesIO]

Yeah, are those donkey's from scratch or are they stickers/used before on habbo? Because those are also the same.

Is the guy/girl who made it still around? They could have at least asked to use their work, the saloon has no Habbo logo or anything Habbo related on it so unless the guy/girl submitted it to them or gave them permission to use it then they shouldn't be using it.

why bother?

The alt has habbos on therefore the image is copyright to habbo.

END OF.

[toxic]

why bother?

The alt has habbos on therefore the image is copyright to habbo.

END OF.

Just because you put 'END OF' in capitals doesn't mean it's the end of something or that your point is valid.

Something can not be copyrighted on the basis that it has something copyrighted on or with-in it.

On your basis; If i was to go take a picture of myself wearing an 'aero bar' costume.. (not that i have done.. :eusa_whis..) the picture of myself would then be copyright of nestle and they would then have complete permission to go use the picture of me in anyway they wish?.. No, of course they wouldn't.

They didn't own the picture of the saloon just because it had habbos around it, if that was the case then tons of companies would be chucking their logo on anything they wish.

I Think the only other person who realises the same point as me is Beamer185.

Anyway, it's not like the guy/girl will sue but if they didn't ask for permission i think it's a bit low of them (not that we have any evidence they didn't ask).

[AgnesIO]

Just because you put 'END OF' in capitals doesn't mean it's the end of something or that your point is valid.

Something can not be copyrighted on the basis that it has something copyrighted on or with-in it.

On your basis; If i was to go take a picture of myself wearing an 'aero bar' costume.. (not that i have done.. :eusa_whis..) the picture of myself would then be copyright of nestle and they would then have complete permission to go use the picture of me in anyway they wish?.. No, of course they wouldn't.

They didn't own the picture of the saloon just because it had habbos around it, if that was the case then tons of companies would be chucking their logo on anything they wish.

I Think the only other person who realises the same point as me is Beamer185.

Anyway, it's not like the guy/girl will sue but if they didn't ask for permission i think it's a bit low of them (not that we have any evidence they didn't ask).

The picture has habbos on it, it makes no difference if habbo stole it.

If habbo want, they can demand that the creator removed the pictures of habbos.

[toxic]

The picture has habbos on it, it makes no difference if habbo stole it.

If habbo want, they can demand that the creator removed the pictures of habbos.

Of course it makes a difference.

Yeah, i did previously state that habbo would be able to make the creator remove pictures of habbos, but that's about as much legal rights that they do have, they would only have further rights if the creator used the alteration for advertisement or profit, which would be in the rights of sue'ing the creator.

[Ajthedragon]

As long as there are habbos in it sulake own it.

[AgnesIO]

As long as there are habbos in it sulake own it.

Exactly.

Of course it makes a difference.

Yeah, i did previously state that habbo would be able to make the creator remove pictures of habbos, but that's about as much legal rights that they do have, they would only have further rights if the creator used the alteration for advertisement or profit, which would be in the rights of sue'ing the creator.

Well can you show me where the creator put copyright on the image please?

Oh wait they didnt.

Therefore sulake have the most copyright voer it.

[Verrou]

I'm sure i've seen some other parts of that background before??

[Hiro]

Either way Reinout's is better.

[Zolifer]

May i point out that they are not identical, as the building on the background is diffrent in size?

The designer made smaller version.