(03-28-2018 03:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote: [ -> ]No, they just used the rendering using the CSU immage. The design team has not been selected yet. The RFP is about to be released for that.
The CSU stadium is the look they want.
That seems like an egregious misuse of IP. Did the people that put out that advertising get permission to use those renderings with modification/edit?
If not, that's bad form.
Edit: I just saw the article posted earlier that confirms we didn't have the rights (as I suspected)...which means they didn't bother looking further into their advertising/promotional materials than doing a Google image search. Surely they know the renderings belonged to SOMEBODY, even if it wasn't CSU. And, not only that, CSU's name and logos wered edited out of the drawings to add Birmingham. Doesn't look good for the marketing department.
More use of the word Renderings. I love it.
(03-29-2018 02:47 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ] (03-29-2018 02:27 PM)LairDweller Wrote: [ -> ] (03-29-2018 12:56 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]Actually, the only design rendering that really matters is the one where the contractor says "This is what we can build with the funding you have provided". We are still a long way from that point. That is why a prioritized wish list of desired fan-centric amenities is important.
I assume you passed your wishlist to someone other than BlazerTalk?
There are regulars on BlazerTalk who know better than I who to tell and how to keep them informed. AttallaBlaze comes to mind since it is in his specialty.
So...just rambling they same thing many times over.
Got it
If this is the worst thing that happens I'm good. Now let's select a project team and get the ball rolling.
I guess we can say the Twitter team made the school go viral?