gg Shaheen and teh L3ft on your education lottery. maybe the first set of proceeds could go to educating your overpriced employees on copyright law

http://www.newsobserver.com/656/story/400414.html

Quote :

"Published: Feb 15, 2006 12:30 AM Modified: Feb 15, 2006 06:23 AM Lottery staff caught cheating on logo design J. Andrew Curliss, Staff Writer With a bit of drama Tuesday, lottery chief Tom Shaheen whipped away a towel and revealed a new logo for the state's $1 billion-a-year lottery. A roomful of people at the lottery commission meeting stared, for the most part, in puzzled silence. They studied the boxy blue and green figure, billed as the symbol of the state's games. It would be on posters. Billboards. Tickets. Finally, Jim Woodward, a lottery commissioner and former chancellor at UNC-Charlotte, wondered about its dominant feature: streaks of green billowing out amid colorful stars. "Does the plant symbolize anything?" he asked. Shaheen dropped his head. "It's fireworks," he said. "Oh," said lottery chairman Charles Sanders, "I thought that looked like a palm tree, myself." The commission had just agreed to hire a full-service ad agency for the lottery, but Shaheen said his staff designed the logo. He liked it. His staff said it depicted an exciting explosion of fireworks against what might be a blue sky. But by the end of the day, the lottery had scrapped the logo, and officials wouldn't release any image of it, despite protests by lawyers for The News & Observer that it is a public record under state law. Lottery spokeswoman Alice Garland said a check of trademark and copyright issues had brought bad news: They can't use the image. Why? The artwork was borrowed -- from a source of stock images familiar to kids, grade school teachers and desperate neighborhood newsletter writers. "We used clip art," she said. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be published, broadcast or redistributed in any manner."

[Edited on February 15, 2006 at 9:20 AM. Reason : ---]

2/15/2006 9:20:19 AM

I like how it went from:
"Shaheen said his staff designed the logo"

to:
"We used clip art," she said.

2/15/2006 9:43:40 AM

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

dude seriously

is this the fema guy?

2/15/2006 9:55:20 AM

Ahaha. The last sentence was the perfect ending. What else can you say to follow that up?

2/15/2006 9:55:40 AM

2/16/2006 9:45:05 AM

hahaha palm tree

2/16/2006 9:50:42 AM

are you kidding me

as if the lottery wasn't sketch enough...

2/16/2006 9:52:27 AM

They used the budget on their salaries. Clip art was all they could afford....

2/16/2006 9:56:45 AM

You don't hire secretaries to do design work. Hire a fucking design studio. A "$1 billion-a-year lottery" industry and they cant spend a few grand on a design? Pathetic.

[Edited on February 16, 2006 at 10:07 AM. Reason : ]

2/16/2006 10:06:37 AM

<sarcasm> I thought the education lottery was the resassignment roulette the kids go through every year. </sarcasm>

2/16/2006 10:11:19 AM

They're just in such a hurry to get it setup before it gets pulled away. It's like a football team that rushes to the line after a controversial play. They're trying to get the play off before the previous play is reviewed.... Super sneaky greasy Easley.

2/16/2006 10:12:25 AM

Clip-Art?

UGH.

2/16/2006 10:16:24 AM

The clip-art lottery logo in question:

2/16/2006 10:54:53 AM

Quote :

"A "$1 billion-a-year lottery" industry and they cant spend a few grand on a design? Pathetic."

2/16/2006 11:36:01 AM

^^GG.

2/16/2006 11:44:44 AM

Quote :

"You don't hire secretaries to do design work. Hire a fucking design studio. A "$1 billion-a-year lottery" industry and they cant spend a few grand on a design? Pathetic."

p.s. hiring secretaries to do shitty design work/webpages is common practice...i mean with that logic, they should also get the secretaries to do the wiring in the office, or perhaps be service fleet mechanics as well

[Edited on February 16, 2006 at 11:57 AM. Reason : .]

2/16/2006 11:52:53 AM

Fuck, I've got a team of 18 secretaries building my army of robots at this very moment.












Here's what they've got so far:

2/17/2006 1:00:02 AM

I've seen worse logos.

[Edited on February 17, 2006 at 1:34 AM. Reason : what's the name of that alternative news paper on campus?]

2/17/2006 1:34:21 AM

wow...sad

2/18/2006 3:26:11 PM

http://www.wral.com/news/7293090/detail.html

damn,

that thing looks like ass.

a firm in charlotte put that crap together?

a student at NCSU that's taken a single graphic design class could do something 10 times better --

i can't figure out which is worse: the fucking horrid typography or the shitty illustrations or the dated color palette...

way to make my home state look like a piece of shit.

-ZiP!-

2/22/2006 8:45:47 AM

Looks like they were determined to get a star on there.

2/22/2006 8:47:39 AM

NC Education Lottery Contact Information

Mailing Address:

NC Education Lottery
56886 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-6886

Telephone (not for use for employment inquiries):

(919) 715-6886 (71-LOTTO)

Fax (please use mailing address for employment inquiries):

(919) 233-7069

-ZiP!-

2/22/2006 8:50:17 AM

yea, this things looks horrible

2/22/2006 9:02:55 AM

I really hope the courts declare the lottery illegal because of the underhanded way it was passed. I guess it will not be resolved until March if I understood the news correctly. It'd be funny if they got all set up to do it only to be smacked down a couple months before it starts.

2/22/2006 5:30:40 PM

wait
do you mean

Quote :

"I really hope the courts declare the lottery illegal because of the underhanded way it was passed"

or

Quote :

"I really hope the courts declare the lottery illegal, because of the underhanded way it was passed"

2/22/2006 6:11:18 PM

define: fiasco

2/22/2006 8:06:08 PM

I really hope the courts declare the lottery illegal due to the the underhanded way it was passed.

is that better?

2/22/2006 9:20:06 PM

uhm

i don't think thats a matter for the courts to address

i mean,
you can hope that its declared illegal
BECAUSE you think it was passed in an underhanded way

but........

2/22/2006 9:23:01 PM

As I understand it the law may not have been legally passed. There is a rule that certain legislation
has to be voted on 3 consecutive days. Opponents argue that the lottery is a tax and as such meets the criteria to be voted on 3 days. You may recall that Black and his gang passed it in 2 days of voting. That was a violation of state law thus making the lottery illegal. As I understood the news there will be a hearing about this matter some time in March. I think if the judge finds the lottery legislation is in fact a tax ( that is what is disputed ) then it may void NC's legal authority to conduct a lottery.

It's not just what I think, there is a group taking legal action as I've desciribed above. Personally, I don't care to much if we have one or not. But if we do they ought to lower taxes concurrently rather than just increasing state spending (which is what Easly plans to do).

2/22/2006 10:51:32 PM

how EXACTLY is the lottery a tax?? its certainly not compulsory which is almost part of the definition of a tax

2/22/2006 11:07:42 PM

right, gotcha. they call sales taxes "taxes" as a fluke of the English language...

2/22/2006 11:40:51 PM

is the "sales tax" a compulsory charge on purchases?

thought so

2/22/2006 11:52:12 PM

^^yeah
next time you buy your cream of wheat
or whatever the fuck republicans eat
just tell them you don't want to pay the taxes
since its not compulsory

[Edited on February 22, 2006 at 11:54 PM. Reason : IF I UNDERSTAND]

2/22/2006 11:53:48 PM

It wasn't just "taxes" either, I think the 3-day rule applied to bills that generated "revenue" for the state or something like that... if that is the wording of the relevant state law then I think it's pretty clear that the lottery was enacted illegally. Anyway, the lottery is a tax on stupid people.

2/23/2006 12:07:17 AM

well
since you're clearly the legal expert here
i'll abstain in trying to argue with you
because clearly you've done your research

2/23/2006 12:12:56 AM

actually, every article I have read on the matter states that the sticking point is whether or not the lottery bill counts as a bill that raises "revenue." so, its not just a simple matter of is it a "tax." Instead, its "is lottery revenue 'revenue'?"

how's that for playing with wording?

2/23/2006 1:17:18 AM

Quote :

"HaLo: is the "sales tax" a compulsory charge on purchases? thought so"

Are you required to buy anything?

thought so

2/23/2006 9:15:13 AM

I suppose people could just beg for food. Most functional members of society just buy it.

I suppose you could grow your own food. But you might have to break down and buy a few seeds.

2/23/2006 9:19:41 AM

but wait, then we'd be getting away from the idealist debate and recognizing realities...like the reality the lottery is a tax. can't do that.

2/23/2006 9:25:06 AM

Yeah, it's a tax. I mean, if it wasn't why is the lottery state run?

2/23/2006 9:32:49 AM

Quote :

"well since you're clearly the legal expert here i'll abstain in trying to argue with you because clearly you've done your research"

never claimed to be a legal expert, I just heard it on the news and it caught my ear. I was hoping
that some more informed person might add to what I heard either pro or con.

Quote :

"actually, every article I have read on the matter states that the sticking point is whether or not the lottery bill counts as a bill that raises "revenue." so, its not just a simple matter of is it a "tax." Instead, its "is lottery revenue 'revenue'?""

half the news stories on it seemed to portray it as a question of wether the lottery should be considered a "tax" or not. That might be debatable, at least in the court of public opinion. Then in constrast other stories indicated the debate was about "revenue". I think the fact that the lottery
will raise "revenue" for NC is inescapable. So one has to wonder why some news outlets were twisting the story to be about taxes, that is clearly a weaker position than the argument based on revenues.

But, I'm no legal expert. Just basing my opinions on the obvious meanings of words which as
we all know may or may not be the legal meaning of words.

2/23/2006 11:07:27 PM

You don't even need a design class to make a logo better than that. Fuck, I don't know too many people who couldn't make a logo better than that.

2/24/2006 10:24:15 AM

I don't know why everyone thinks the logo is so ugly. Look at Virginia, SC, and Georgias... they're alll pretty much the same - simple and to the point. An Advertising Agency came up with this - I'm pretty sure they have people that know what they're doing.

how many logos out there are brilliant pieces of work? not really all that many.

2/24/2006 1:00:54 PM

logos of what?

anything?

there's an assload of brilliant logos made over the history of graphic design

[Edited on February 24, 2006 at 5:14 PM. Reason : +]

2/24/2006 5:12:26 PM

Quote :

"I don't know why everyone thinks the logo is so ugly. Look at Virginia, SC, and Georgias... they're alll pretty much the same - simple and to the point. An Advertising Agency came up with this - I'm pretty sure they have people that know what they're doing. how many logos out there are brilliant pieces of work? not really all that many."

Bright future ahead of you in marketing, with such a shitty attitude.

It is people like you that give the field of advertising and the field of graphic design bad reputations --

Don't shit on my profession simply because of your own ignorance.

Thanks.

-ZiP!-

[Edited on February 24, 2006 at 10:00 PM. Reason : quote]

2/24/2006 10:00:19 PM

I think an apple with three windows made to look like a slot machine is where its at...

2/25/2006 11:46:02 AM

Zip - I'm not shitting on your profession.. I don't know where you got that I had a shitty attitude about this.

I WANT to get into advertising, so I don't see why you'd think I wanted to give it a shitty name. I have no idea why you think i'm ignorant just because I see nothing wrong with the logo.

If you thought I was knocking on you or graphic design, I'm sorry - I'm just saying its not that ugly.

2/25/2006 1:34:32 PM

Yeah, it looks like crap, but let's face it:

For most people, the logo design will not be the deciding factor in whether they buy a ticket.

2/25/2006 1:52:08 PM

In other news, they've designed a new logo:

2/25/2006 2:04:32 PM

Aha.

2/25/2006 2:12:51 PM