ops, GAP did it again

Out of context: Reply #18

• Started
• Last post
• 40 Responses

• Iggyboo0

  I am agreeing with the many of you who think that this case imperticular is not a big deal. One the photograph of the car is not similar enough, note the lack of symbols in the grill, so forget about the photographer and photograph that the designer may have sourced the car's look and feel would be something needed to be licensed if it looked similar enough to a certain car model and make. And it is impossible to tell what the car really is which in this case I think it is too hard to tell based upon that illustration than its in the gray area. I'd be surprised if Gap loses sleep over this.

  Iggyboo 0Permalink

  UpvoteDownvote

  Flag

  • oops: I meant to write in the last line and it is impossible to tell what the make of the car is based upon the illustration imo.Iggyboo
  • its not about the car its about the original photoDodecahedron
  • My point is that if you were to make this shirt your first threat would be the car maker, and it is generic imo.Iggyboo
  • It's clearly a Jaguar. Not impossible to tell what the make is. Plus the pics too small to tell whether the badges are there.JerseyRaindog
  • I think they are, just toned out if you look closer.JerseyRaindog

  Show [[ numHiddenNotes ]] more notesAdd Note

  SaveCancel

View thread