In the world of audio-video works, it can be difficult to show the substantial similarity between an author's original work and somebody else's knock-off. This is due to the large number of variable and design elements in such works, and the mostly lawful ability of someone to create an homage or 'inspired-by' sort of piece that apes a prior piece's style.
Below is a link to a YTWWN reader's original work, which lampoon's the layperson's lack of hockey knowledge, and includes creative and quirky hand-drawn animation adds. There is also a link to a Luminosity ad that had the author of the first video scratching his head. It is not yet known if little white spiky jagged animated streaks shot forward from his head as he did so. Is the second piece an homage to the first? A rip? To what extent is there a difference?
Last fall I was working at a design studio in Seattle called Digital Kitchen and was able to work on a personal project. For those who know me well, or even briefly, know that I am a diehard Canadian-born hockey fan (Canucks) living in the US. I decided to use this as the subject matter and wanted to get the opinions of some of my fellow American creatives on the sport of hockey, which they may or may not know anything about. I combined that with a simple cell animation style that I had yet to really experiment with.
The project turned out great and I had a lot of fun doing it. It wasn't a style that I invented or even advanced in anyway, but rather a simplified version of some other really magnificent work.
Then last week I got a few emails and messages from design friends saying that they had seen a commercial on TV that looked exactly like my Hockey 101 video and if I had done it? I hadn't, but still checked out the link I was being sent and sure enough it was an almost shot for shot remake with different content animations and people. It was the same simple white drawing overtop of footage as people answer questions or expressed thoughts and the imagry appeared. As opposed to my video where I hand drew each animation, theirs was a cheaper knockoff with looping animations that didn't have the same effect. I didn't know whether to be flattered or angry.
My animation had generated me no profit, nor was I interested in it doing so. I would have been thrilled to have been contacted by Lumosity or whoever was producing the content to create something similar to my previous video and be able to benefit that way. Instead someone basically cookie cut my concept, framing, execution, and animation without any reference to myself and generated a ton of views and is probably profiting from online and broadcast spots.
I may be wrong and just need to toughen up, but I would love to get a few more perspectives or some advice on how/if I should proceed in any way.
A local skater told me about this. Rather quick, too. Mikendo started these "Deadline" videos August 29th. I opened my Youtube account early July and posted my first "Flatline" video as early as July 14. It has nothing to do with money, fame, or subscribers...a bite is a bite is a bite.
If something is a parody, fine. Understandable. If it isn't obvious enough for everyone to realize it is a parody, give credit where credit is due. I feel, in this case, the coincidence excuse isn't an option.
But we did! Yes, folks...Jacqueline's bratty daughter with the entitled attitude, Ashley Holmes, from The Real Housewives of New Jersey ripped off Marion Bolognesi's artwork as her own. You can see this for yourself on Season 3's Episode titled "Auld Lang Syne for an Eye."
Marion's Original Piece
Pental GB to promote their new pens created this Youtube video on their channel on promoted on their site.
Their video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5bREaqfbMk The Pentel Rip
Is a direct copy of Paper Parkour by Serehne Teh http://www.sereneteh.com/
I know that people can be inspired by such work but a direct copy is not acceptable.
This is a video I worked hard to make. Took me 2 months to plan and finish off. It's called Youtube My Facebook
Today I just realised the idea was blatantly ripped off by Juventus Football Club in order to promote their facebook page.
Juventus Official Facebook Page
This is Rémi's infamous 'Pac-Man' video, which I remember seeing many years ago (this copy was uploaded to Youtube in 2009):
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/pIrvpn3k9A4?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
..which was then shamelessly ripped off by the international advertising conglomerate Saatchi & Saatchi, for a New Zealand-only advert in 2010:
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/JxfT2s6ey0E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
There's no mistaking this; they took the work of a highly original French humorist, and made a lame + unfunny facsimile of it. And, of course, they all got paid very handsomely for their amazing originality on this highly creative project. (They probably made more than Rémi made from his video, too, which just makes it worse.)
Guilty parties include:
Dylan Harrison -- Executive 'Creative' Director
Scott Huebscher -- Digital 'Creative' Director
Rich Robson -- Art Director
Jon Austin -- Copywriter
Producer -- Declan Cahill
I designed a poster for Disney's Tron Legacy about 2 years ago, completely self-initiated or "fan art", something I created out of a love of the style. Well, the images below basically tell the story. It recently came to my attention that the poster was taken and used to promote a big rave event in Brazil called Kaballah & Euphoria. Very blatant, just took my image without permission and used it as promotion. Total theft.
According to the source code, the site was created by Atash Design. Numerous emails have been sent to these people and to the event promoters with no effect or reply.
The Signalnoise Tron Legacy poster
The website for Kaballah & Euphoria
Recently, I got an email from my friend telling me someone had bit a commercial I directed for Vans Shoes Vault line, coinciding with the release of my shoe, The Slip Up. The shoe was a slip on with a photo of a lace up on the upper. The commercial was also an optical illusion.
Here is the commercial I directed about a year ago:
Donny Miller Slip-up Commercial Vans Shoes
Here is Leo Burnett Sao Paulo's Samsung commercial:
Samsung Optical Illusion Commercial Leo Burnett Sao Paulo
Now, I will be the first to admit that great minds think alike, but I'd be hard pressed to believe that someone there didn't see my commercial. This speaks to a bigger problem that agencies have always had. Most agencies that I've worked with have these "art directors" who are nothing more than rip off artists. They buy books, scour the internet and generally take credit for other artists art, because the guy at the top is out of touch with what is happening in the art world or has less integrity than the art director below him. They get "inspired" by artists. The reality of these situations and all of the legitimate claims here on YTWWN is that 95% of the art directors at agencies are hacks and are cheap, trying to save the company money - a company who usually has more than enough cash. The whole "Hey, I could do that myself." is what is ruining culture and watering down the purity of art. In the past, I have turned down lucrative offers from agencies to be employed as a creative director for these reasons. Working with agencies on a freelance basis can be good.
Dreamworks pictures ripped off Los Angeles based street-artist SMEAR's character and used it in, Jerry Seinfeld's, Bee Movie. The character appears on an animated truck in the film 4 minutes and 17 seconds into chapter 7 of the film.
The graffiti SMEAR image has been uploaded on a Los Angeles graffiti website since 2006. The movie came out on November 2nd 2007.
Last I heard SMEAR was mad about the whole affair. Not sure if he has taken any legal action as of yet.