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.
My friend stumbled upon this little gem and sent it my way:
The title of the album is an obvious rip of the logo I created for my college grad show back in 2009:
The idea behind the logo is not that unique, but the logo was silk screened and converted to a vector and has a very unique grunge look. If the designer who saw this thought it was so creative, they should have gone and reproduced it, not copy and pasted it.
I have never had to deal with an issue like this before as most of my art stays off the net, but this logo was all over facebook. This obviously isn't a big name artist, but they are using my logo on their album cover and not crediting me or my design team in any way. Ridiculous!
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.
Recently, I was linked to the trailer for a Zombie Apocalypse videogame named"Dead Island". A few minutes into it, I noticed that the design on the little girl's pink shirt reminded me a lot of a Lisa Frank character named "Surfer Girl".
Here is a screen capture from about 2:11 in the video clearly showing the shirt.
Here is a picture from the Lisa Frank website of the character "Surfer Girl".
I even overlaid one on top of the other to see if this was just a coincidence, but it seems like the shirt in the game is a trace and recolour job. (The head and body have been altered some, but they still match up.)
Is it really THAT hard to design a videogame shirt that doesn't copy the work of someone else?
[editor note: this one is interesting- it's a pretty close thing, I can see how the realworld image inspired the one in the video game. But this is pretty meta, no? You've got a youtube video... of a character in a video game wearing a T-shirt... with an image of a different animated character on the shirt. If Lisa Frank came to us with a request for legal action, I'm not sure who we'd want to go after first. ]
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
Above: A fan-made video for Sam Sparro's 2009 song "Black and Gold", done by Kris Martinez. Underneath: rue21's new tee design.
This specific font was even called out in the comments of the YouTube video.
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 was watching Britain's got talent last night and this act got through with rave reviews from the panel saying how original it was:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQOSHtIOwrM&feature=related or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYiA-q8enk8
(sorry, couldn't get the embedded youtube to work at time of posting, maybe it'll fix itself tho)
there's another video on the internet with only 170,000,000 views, "the evolution of dance" by Judson Laipply, that it might just have been based on, just a little:
Some of the dance moves and music are identical; twist again...billy Jean...thriller....YMCA....birdie song, and probably several more. I can't believe no one noticed at the time, or in editing before airing the show. Something tells me he might just get sussed before the next round!