My this item removed. Why.? I dont understand… Some one tell me Please…
Feel sorry for you, bro definetly new bestseller. Maybe because it was similar to that layered style logo reveal, from top selling items? But i’m sure u shoud contact staff about that.
Best thing to do is to contact support. I don’t know if they’ve send you an email about this, if so maybe you can respond to that.
it was like updated version of that item. You even made identical preview imgage. Probably someone reported it. The logo levels seemed to be very similarly placed.
I liked your project better though. Sad, probably I would have bought it if I would need a corporate logo animation. But yeah, it had many similarities to the original leveled logo. Why would you make same image prieview I don’t get it :)))
I think yours is a lot better than the other one, but it’s VERY similar! You’ve even used the same music in your preview.
As for the differences between the two… you can take a picture of Burt Reynolds and alter the background, remove his mustache, change his shirt and colour his hair… but it’s still a picture of Burt Reynolds!
- Sold between 250 000 and 1 000 000 dollars
- Author was Featured
- Item was Featured
- Contributed a Tutorial to a Tuts+ Site
- Repeatedly Helped protect Envato Marketplaces against copyright violations
- Exclusive Author
- Has been a member for 3-4 years
I think yours is a lot better than the other one, but it’s VERY similar! You’ve even used the same music in your preview. As for the differences between the two… you can take a picture of Burt Reynolds and alter the background, remove his mustache, change his shirt and colour his hair… but it’s still a picture of Burt Reynolds!
A very valid example.
Very good lesson and very nice step forward from envato in encouraging on making unique items.
I disagree. I think this one’s a bad decision, actually, and sends out a confused signal.
If it was a copy and paste job from the original, then fair enough, I suppose, and only someone who’s had a look inside the file could know that.
But saying that that’s a copy is like saying that extrusion, reflection and specular highlights is now a copyrightable asset. It was well done and aesthetically different from the original and the sales showed there was a demand on the market place too. Removing files like this forces authors into an aesthetic of adding. Minimalism on the Hive will become a question of staking your turf and getting there first. Bad, bad, bad.
What’s more, I don’t know if these files use the script, but considering that you can knock the technical part of a file like this up in a couple of minutes using 3D Extruder, it seems a bit rich for authors to be squabbling amongst themselves about who thought of it first. And incidentally, if 3D Extruder had been used on both files, then the structure inside the project would look almost identical.
I don’t doubt that nefos created his project with the original file in mind, in order to cash in on sales. Naming the file after the original is a dead giveaway. Using the same music is downright naive, and perhaps it deserves to be chucked off the marketplace for that alone.
But, music and intent aside, I think that this does actually achieve taking the visual principle further.