That’s the statement I’ll remember and pass on if necessary. OK? 
Yes only when posting whole scenes (Several minutes long you should add it) Short snippets it is not needed. Also it is not allowed to crop it out only for the purpose to get rid of the watermark / logo.
Thanks a lot for clearing that up. It has been explained multiple times before? Then obviously I didn’t do my homework before posting that other thread.
Adding a waterwark replacemet, at least the way I did it here, is quite a tedious procedure. I made a recordiong, played it back with an external subtitle track, made a second recording of that playback and finally had to convert it, all the while having problems with video dimensions and filesizes. I’m glad if I don’t need to do that as I don’t intend to post anywhere else.
1 Like
Yes you can be happy because you don’t need to do that 
You might want to read that 2nd paragraph a little more closely. It’s not a matter of interpretation. It categorically states, twice, that the logo is REQUIRED for videos. Part-length and full length videos MUST include the logo. Those are VHTV’s rules. @Julio137347
Please don’t start this again here. Nobody ever enf___ed that rule. Don’t confuse him and let’s get back to topic.
Let’s hope we can get to topic now or I have to move some things here to the topic discussion about this matter.
You mean you never wanted it enf___ed because you didn’t want to put the logo on videos. VHTV set the rules about their logo on videos. The rules are what they are. From the moment those rules were posted by VHTV, you claimed, erroneously, that watermarks were not required on videos, and you’re still giving out that false information.
There’s no confusion, except the misinformation you keep spreading. The rule was explicitly stated about the logo on videos, and you have always rejected and refuted it.
And there it is, that threat of moving posts to manipulate people to do what you want. You want to move stuff, you go ahead, as long as you move your posts along with everyone else’s. I have a copy of all of them.
It was not about CC, VHTV made that statement regarding the discussion that we had on posting videos on this forum. The Logo is required with the Exception of " Zoomed in " short videos.
So here’s my thoughts about where some of the confusion and disagreements about this rule might stem from. Mine included, as, to be honest, I’m still not quite clear about this.
We’re an international community here and the members have mastered the English language to different degrees or use the various computer translation methods. Also the patterns and figures of speech of your own native language have a great influence on how you might express your thoughts in English or intrepret something others have written.
I’m still struggling with that second paragraph by VHTV Project Team:
VHTV naming/logo is required for videos, though it might be acceptable to put those for zoomed in parts of short videos. Part-length and full length scenes must include VHTV naming/logo.
I’m not sure if that is less than perfect English or if I’m just too stupid to intrepret it correctly. I’m also not sure if translation tools can be relied on here, in my experience these programs seem to make quite some assumptions about what an imperfect input is supposed to mean.
My problem is with those three little words TO PUT THOSE, I think I need some context for PUT.
TO PUT THOSE logos away?
TO PUT THOSE logos back in if you have cut them away?
TO PUT up with THOSE short zoomed in videos even if the logo is missing?
From what I’m seeing some people interpret Projct Team’s second paragraph as meaning: Project Team can accept the absence ot the naming/logo in short zoomed in videos. From my point of view this interpretation aligns with common sense.
Others understand it as: Project Team can accept short zoomed in videos, but only if you put the naming/logo that you cut away, back in inside your framing.
But if that were the true meaning, why would they make it so complicated and differentiate between three kinds of videos when all they really needed to say is: “VHTV naming/logo is required for videos.” ? Simple as that. Full stop. No exceptions.
So yeah, I’m still not 100% sure which is the intended meaning.
And also, but this is another point, is there a precise definition of what is a short, part-length and full-length video. I’m assuming “short” equals “preferably under 2 minutes” and “full length” is a complete sex act from foreplay to money shot.
Don’t worry too much about it.
Post your videos in whatever way is easiest for you and if they break the rules, you will be made aware of it. And as long as nobody complains, everything seems to be ok. 
Just do like you like to do. As long as you do not post very long videos of a complete scene nobody will care about that stupid logo at all 
Yeah that is right.
ARGH! 
So I write a scientific essay about the finer points of PUT. Then I step away for a well earned cup of coffee and a slice of perfect cream-cheesecake. Perfect because I made it myself. And then it dawns on me…
Could this all be just because of a single f*cking typo? The kind of mistake that auto-correct or spell.check will actively introduce into your writing?
Consider this: If it’s CUT instead of PUT it all becomes crystal clear:
VHTV naming/logo is required for videos, though it might be acceptable to CUT those for zoomed in parts of short videos. Part-length and full length scenes must include VHTV naming/logo.
That makes so much sense it has to be the answer. And that’s what I’m going with.
It was posted in English, but I don’t know if it was translated from another language or not. I believe he may have left out the word ‘not’ before ‘to put those’, IDK for sure.
I agree, I think that’s exactly what it means and as you said it aligns with common sense.
The rest of that paragraph, however, leaves no doubt that the logo is required on all other videos.