Diddy rips off Pentagram
- Started
- Last post
- 105 Responses
- colonially0
Creatively, there is nothing in existence
that you can call your own. & you know this.
- colonially0
From Graffiti to Rock&Roll,
You are me, a stolen soul.
- colonially0
^nope. That distraction doesn't help.
- elvis stole the blues, any complaint?neowe
- not even close.akrok
- he even admits to stealing riffs from other less popular artistsneowe
- akrok has a thin line of acceptable sampling he's not too sure where is though.neowe
- if you sing. i can lay down some phat beats. lol.akrok
- phuck yeah, i know a lyricistneowe
- juhls0
Marian Bantjes rules
- colonially0
'fuck outa here!
- matnz0
- I say its the other way around.Dodecahedron
- or notDodecahedron
- neowe0
"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources."
- Albert Einstein
- ukit0
Whether the design is officially a logo or a font or something else isn't the issue. Every piece of artwork - movie, song, whatever - is all protected by copyright automatically. You don't need to do anything except have proof that you created it first.
The fact that he slightly modified a piece of work doesn't exempt him from being sued. Whether something is considered plagiarism isn't based on whether a single letter was changed or whether he used blue instead of black, it's a subjective legal decision decided by a judge.
A lot of the examples that were cited earlier as examples of how the system works probably do violate copyright. Campbell didn't originally object to the Warhol soup can painting, but they eventually obtained the rights to control how it's used. The Girl Talk albums were released on a label called Illegal Art as a reference to the fact that they broke copyright law. For that matter, there are probably more than a few albums at your local chain record store that are filled with uncleared samples. The issue is really whether anyone decides to enforce the law.
- Countryman0
BURN THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!
- hold on...*runs and buys hotdogs, buns, ketchup, beer, etc*. back...okay. get started.akrok
- e-pill0
sean john reminds me of shepard fairey .. just a vandal who takes other's peoples hard work for their own claim.. another useless artist.
- he's definitely useful to pop-culture just as warhol was.doesnotexist
- Melanie0
The only reason to justify this obvious rip is if you yourself rip other people's work. Staying in denial eases the guilt.
It's a rip and if someone did that to me I'd fuckin' gut them or at the very least make them pay me for doing their creative thinking for them.
- randommail0
Look better and makes more sense to be on a t-shirt than on a poster for Yale.
- 74LEO0
we arent being crowd sourced are we? anyone her from the girl who designed it for pentagram?
- ask away http://www.bantjes.c…neowe
- her footer: All images and text © Marian Bantjes. Do not borrow or steal.lambsy
- yeah, i already posted that...neowe
- tOki0
Qubo was formed in 2006. QBN has been around far longer than that.
Fucking trolls should get their facts right =.=
- inteliboy0
neowe = jazx?
- randommail0
Let's assume that graphic design is the search for a visual solution to a problem. Perhaps there isn't always just one correct solution (as someone like Paul Rand would claim), but there are definitively incorrect solutions.
So if Designer #1 comes up with a design solution that is incorrect in the context of one design problem, but then Designer #2 "rips" that same design solution and correctly applies it to a different design problem, should Designer #1 just shut the hell up?
And should Designer #2 be given credit for being "smart" and providing his client with a good design solution? And ignore the fact that he committed plagiarism.
Likely this would be a rare case. But maybe there are cases where plagiarism is somewhat justifiable.
- @randommail
What you're describing sounds like communism:)
ukit - lol wut?
Maybe, but I did lol.randommail
- @randommail