Supre (Australia/New Zealand) vs Johnny Cupcakes
March 15th, 2008 by the knight of prosperity
While out shopping with my girlfriend in Auckland, New Zealand today we spotted this blatant rip off of the classic Johnny Cupcakes (www.johnnycupcakes.com) shirt…
And here’s the original Johnny shirt…
I have written to Johnny and told him of the steal just prior to writing this post
I will update if I hear back.
It’s so frustrating to see someone who I really respect getting ripped off by someone like Supre with chain stores across two countries.
Surely they can afford to employ someone with their own ideas….no?
Is there anything I can do here?
Obviously some injustices have been done, I want to sort them out!
Is this just an annoying copy or can we actually do something about this?
(22 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading ...
To be honest I’m not surprised at all. Supre is fairly cheap and skanky.
It is disappointing because Johnny’s is so much better… not sure if you could do anything, but it might be worth a try. They’ll always get away with it if no one ever does anything.
I’d never heard of Johnny Cupcakes before, but having looked at their blog it seems that cupcake is their main logo. That makes the stealing worse in my mind…
Hmm, I just read Johnny’s story. I think they’ll care that this design was stolen.
well the fact that on the print has a little “tm” on it makes me think he’s made the effort to protect it so this rip off should be in violation of something.
I haven’t heard from anyone at JC yet, but if/when I do, I’ll update.
What’s funny is it’s not like it’s some shirt idea that JC had first and they ripped, they’re just using the Johnny Cupcakes LOGO. They just literally took his logo and slapped it on one of their shirts. What morons.
What the fuck guys? How many different symbols/items do you see plastered across the top of crossbones these days? Yes it’s eerily similar and they probably did see it and go oh yeah let’s do that but come on, a cupcake crossed with a skull and cross bones? Hardly something you can bitch about! Don’t get me wrong I’m a huge JC fan and yes it is there logo/trademark, but it’s a cupcake and crossbones for gods sake! Cupcakes along with love hearts, bows, skulls, candy, any cutesy little item these days is so common, and to cross them with crossbones is nothing new! Look at half of Supre’s or any other tacky cheap fashion stores stock, it’s covered in tacky little skull and all those listed above, you gonna bitch at them for producing slogan tees next? So yes I’m saying they probably did copy him to an extent but unless it’s identical you can’t say that a cupcake with crossbones of any variation whatsoever can be held against anyone producing it.
Also… isn’t a skull and crossbones a symbol of piracy?
OMG THEY TOTALLY RIPPED OFF THE JOLLY RODGER!!!
True true.
This guy must be tired of being ripped off but then again if you think a skull and crossbones pastiche as your ID is original then you are likely to see something that looks like it’s a rip of your brand.
Anything above crossbones has been old news for years.
yeah, I know it’s not a 100% “no one would have ever thought of this idea”, but if thats your argument then you could say that about anything on this page.
it’s physically impossible for the human mind to invent something it has never seen before.
and Johnny’s story is that he was using Cupcakes to point fun at pop culture icons
read his story on his page.
but none of that matters because it’s his logo
it’s trademarked.
Disney has a mouse made up of three circles, how much more original is that than a cupcake with cross bones?
I say less but if someone had ripped that off you wouldn’t be arguing coincidence or that we were nit picking
it doesn’t matter how simple it is, it’s a trade marked logo and it’s obviously been ripped off
which if I’m not mistaken, is what this website is about…isn’t it?
anyway I hadn’t ever seen a cupcake cross bones combo before Johnny’s…and how many years has it been since cupcakes and/or cross bones have been invented?
it’s a rip off, and thats what this website is about, alerting people to rip offs
hence, this post.
Inspiration maybe but not a rip, it’s not close enough, very close but not enough, there are more than a few differences between them and his is trademarked but it’s black and white for starters, maybe show a version with colour or a pattern or a heart on top like supres then I’ll agree it’s a rip, it’s a basic cupcake and basic crossbones. It’s def not an identical copy so not a straight rip.
let your “heroes” do their own police work.
“it’s physically impossible for the human mind to invent something it has never seen before.” WHAT A RETARDED COMMENT.
Mike, i was just going to say exactlly the same thing. Lol!What. i must have already psychically seen your comment ¬.¬
But yeah “it’s physically impossible for the human mind to invent something it has never seen before.” WTF? i’d love to hear the reasoning behind this statement.
Onto the cupcake rip, it is trademarked, but legally, it’s on iffy ground because the rip has been changed, a rip has to be pretty close to the original to violate trademark.
I believe it’s a rip- think of the cheap designers they hire- and the sheer number of designs they have to push out just to make their quota for the week.
Supre is for sluts!
Mike – You’re awesome, that’s the best comment in the history of this site. I laughed rather hard and had to quote that comment quite a few times to different people at work today as it’s one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard.
Laura – Totally true! Theirs is trademarked but because theirs is a silhouette with barely any detail and the supre one has so many different features as well as a slightly varied shape it’s not a rip, plus the heart rather than a circle on top, sounds silly but for a general cupcake above crossbones this one is too different to be called a rip. Most cupcakes above crossbones would look rather similar to this and be called a rip in the same way.
You can’t base whether or not something is a rip purely on the fact that your personal opinion of the company is that it’s cheap & slutty, especially over what the actual image/slash product is itself.
“Supre is for sluts!”… Grow up.
Hey LoungeKat here’s one for you… “Stupid comments are for stupid c*nts!”… True.
ok so the “physically impossible” line does sound a little stupid, but I don’t think you got what I meant.
A painter said it once when they visited a school I was attending.
I meant it’s physically impossible to draw or create something not influenced by anything you’ve ever seen before.
like draw an alien animal with no resemblance to any animal or any thing you’ve ever seen before.
I has to be 100% new and everything about it has to have no influence from anything you’ve ever seen.
does it have wings?
oops, birds have those…horns…oops, they’re from a cow, etc.
do you understand what I mean?
I know it sounds retarded when taken completely at face value, but it does make sense if you think about it.
sorry for sounding stupid, but I understand what she meant when she said it so I’m using it in that context and directed at the creation of a drawing or design.
Hey ANNON, Did you not read what LoungeKat had to say before that? The people they have to hire have to work fast and make LOTS of designs… so “borrowing” is bound to happen.
What would you rather be a stupid c*nt or a stupid c*nt that can’t read (and who also has NOTHING to add!)
Yes BENT’DOVER actually I can read and did read the entire comment, did you read mine? Or LoungeKats for that matter? If not, please read again. If you had read my comment you would have seen that I gave a completely valid response to LoungeKats full post.
As I said, just because they MAY hire ‘cheap’ designers who MAY have a huge quota does not automatically qualify this as a rip, and the fact that ‘borrowing is bound to happen’ also does not automatically qualify this as a rip. Can you please explain to me how you can possibly argue this point as I’d love to hear it?!
Are we the big bad company police now or what? I’m not arguing that this isn’t a rip, I’m saying you can’t come to that conclusion without taking what the actual image/product is itself into consideration. That’s ridiculous, do you find someone guilty of a crime just because they look like a bit of a bad ass without looking at the evidence?
Conclusion: Yes I can read and by the way (LoungeKats wasn’t the most extensive comment I’ve ever come across) and I have actually added quite a bit already, thanks.
who really cares anyways.
Hmmm… Who really cares anyways? I think whoever visits, posts and reads (aside from the small exception being you) cares, anyways. The way I see it the point of this site is for people who care about people ripping to come and discuss rips, whether or not they are rips etc. etc.
This is the second year Cupcake Royale in Seattle has used a similar design for their annual Deathcake Valentine’s Day cupcake, and they sell tees too. I don’t think they stole the idea- I just think the idea is so fucking stupid and basic that there were probably hundreds of designs just like it in the world.
Cupcake Royale:
http://tinyurl.com/3dftmt
Its a rip. You can see that the JC design has been scanned, vectored, slightly altered(heart, bottom-right bone end), and then sent to the fabric cutters.
So what it has been altered? It wasnt just the concept, but the actual design itself that was ripped.
Also, to those who say this design is so common, please post links next time.
If you think you should be standing up or admiring Johnny cupcakes you should probably do a little bit more research. The fact is that nobody in the clothing industry is worth admiring, we’re all a bunch of thiefs. I mean you see so much you sometimes forget if ideas or thoughts are things that you’ve already sean or not. I can’t remember the artist Johnny Cupcakes is copying but if you research it you’ll find it, the only original factor here is JC put it on clothing and the original artist did paintings only I believe.
if it makes you feel any better that first shirt is f’n ugly as hell
the white on black icon is much more dynamic