Talk:Threadless

message: I have removed the sentence that says Threadless retains rights to use selected designs on clothing, while creators retain other rights. There is conflicting information on Threadless' website, and this sentence should probably stay gone until the issue is resolved. Here is what the threadless FAQ says:
:"If we choose to print a design, the designer is giving us exclusive rights to print and sell it on apparel. All other mediums are open for the designer to use the design." 
And here is what their actual terms and conditions say:
:"If your Design is selected for use by Threadless.com, you acknowledge that you assign to skinnyCorp LLC and its subsidiaries and affiliates (hereinafter collectively "Threadless.com") the entire right, title, and interest in and to the copyright in your Design including the right to sue for past infringement and the right to further sublicense the Design, for its sole and exclusive use on and in connection with the Items. You also acknowledge that you waive all "moral" rights that you may have in and to your Design. " 
It's not clear to me exactly where Threadless stands on the issue of creators retaining rights. The FAQ suggests one thing, and the legalese suggests another. It may be that Threadless assumes all rights and then grants creators a license to use their own work for anything but clothing, but that's only a conjecture. I don't think this should go in the article until someone can explicitly confirm who has what rights.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anotherpioneer (talk • contribs) 16:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Creator/IP rights

message: LUElinks does not exist. However big a controversy B-Rex was, it has no place on Wikipedia where we do not exist. This edit doesn't even exist. 68.149.27.46 01:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: stop looking for us. cos we don't exist.--JohnDoyle 13:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  LUElinks, B-Rex 

message: I've added notes to the URL links. When reverting these pathetic spammers in future, please report them to Threadless. We wouldn't want the site's good name to be tarnished by a few sneaky idiots. Chris Cunningham 01:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referrer spam 

message: :Image:Threadlesslogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 02:02, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Threadlesslogo.gif

message: Previously the paragraph said that t-shirts were not open sourced, and then went on to explain what the right term was. I thought it would be more 'to the point' and factual-sounding to say what the right term is, and then go on to explain why 'open source' is wrong. --Pipedreambomb 17:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reworded 'crowd sourced' paragraph 

message: It doesn't actually add value to the article. Please remove.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.108.31.34 (talk) 22:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the relevance of the 'crowd sourced' section? 

message: I find it interesting that Threadless tells me exactly how many pixels I'm allowed to use, and then declines my work because it's 'pixellated'.
If the submissions process doesn't work the way they say it does, how much documentation do I need before I post this fact in the article?
Joshua Clement Broyles  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.77.57 (talk) 02:04, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  submissions process 

message: This article mostly appears to be yet another use of Wikipedia for a thinly disguised advertisement.
If the Wikipedia editors are happy that their platform is used for advertising rather than information, so be it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.113.71 (talk) 06:45, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thinly disguised advert 

message: ... Is over-hyped.
I have just checked the Meetups near London section, e.g., and it lists 6 meetup groups.  Of these, four as yet have no members (Rochester, Chatham, Brighton, High Wycombe), one (Cambridge) has three members and one (London itself) has 60 members. In the London group a future meeting is shown, but with no date determined.  The previous meeting was scheduled for over a year ago, but the 'package' from Threadless had not arrived and it seems that the date was changed a number of times and the meeting didn't occur.
All in all, there are all the signs that both Meetup and Wikipedia have been used as publicity machines for a not very convincing campaign.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.113.71 (talk) 06:54, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Meetups section