Diddy rips off Pentagram
- Started
- Last post
- 105 Responses
- neowe0
in regards to the McDonalds M...
something tells me seduction wasn't registered as a company with market intentions through uspto.gov so the artwork as a whole does not constitute a logomark representing company interests in any part of the world.
now if that same seduction were trademarked as a logotype for say a perfume or a clothing company, the company would have infringement rights to protect and possibly loss of revenue claims
but again as the word itself is wholly different it is no different than all the designs that look like the coca cola logo but do not say coca cola
also, in regards to the mcdonalds m, reminds me of this...
totally cheeky, but i always thought the bigger problem with this was the use of the trademarked tag line of i'm lovin' it
- from http://bpcares.co.uk…neowe
- there's no problem with parody and critisismDodecahedron
- but what does mcds have to do with an oil spill? seems derrogatoryneowe
- neowe0
is it ripping when someone else uses similar type? or is the argument here that sean jean likes the seduction and has reduced this type treatment to nearly font status?
a rip would be inserting logos into another's layout or outright plagiarizing the work but as new letters have been made to spell new words...
are you saying no designer has the right to make letters that look like that? that wouldn't be fair, what about all the fonts that look like each other?
heavy inspiration combined with a crybaby mentality
- are you version3? your writing style seems to be similar to his..e-pill
- answer e-pill. it's a valid question.capn_ron
- sure, i'm also hedge and vcr if you ask around enoughneowe
- no i can care less for those nters, im only asking about v3.. is it you?e-pill
- no, actually, i'm none of them, just neoweneowe
- ok not them.. is your name justin?e-pill
- um... no. kinda creepy with the personal questionsneowe
- my name is edd-e, see now its not creepy. so..e-pill
- maybe this is easier for you.. hi im edd-e.. what is your name?edd-e
- d_rek0
neowe,
I think in this case 'rip' = a direct appropriation of the original artwork, which apparently was not authorized or licensed to be used on P. Diddy's apparel.
He ripped that shit the fuck off.
- akrok0
^
it's too close to the original.it's like they sample the song, beats and use half of the lyrics.
- ah..d_rek posted before me. ;-)akrok
- i like how you put that tho.shellie
- :-Dakrokdesign
- neowe0
Uppercase i = I
Lowercase L = lwho to cry to now?
- neowe0
d_rek, how can you say it's "a direct appropriation" the garment says sean jean, the poster says seduction
- d_rek0
neowe,
Don't be naive. The intent is quite obvious. Even though they slightly altered the original artwork many of the original qualities remain unchanged. It's an utter and direct rip-off. No discussion. No arguement. The facts speak for themselves.
Now fuck off cunt.
- ukit0
There's a difference between making an editorial cartoon (protected under fair use doctrine) and simply tracing another company's artwork and then selling it as your own.
- not.
the.
same.
artwork.neowe - sean john
seductionneowe - and you all thought I was badmonospaced
- not.
- monospaced0
^ that change isn't enough to make it original. At first glance they're identical, and the overall treatment, the flourishes and crops and everything, are the same. If it was as simple as a font, it might not be an issue, but this is a modification of a piece that took a lot of hard work to achieve (it seems).
- Dodecahedron0
the first three letters are identical and the 'd' in seduction is now an 'a' in sean.
- ukit0
lol
Where do you get the idea that having it read "sean john" when its obviously the same design makes it OK?
- NotByHand0
Unless you're Marian Bantjes, why do you give a fuck?
- neowe0
being told to fuck off by someone typing is more ignorant than believing sean john owes anyone including pentagram an apology
- vitamins0
I'm bothered because it's hard to read.
- neowe0
1. it doesn't say the same thing, therefore can not be the same design. i seem to be the only one missing this quite valid point.
2. it is not a protected company name.
3. letterforms are not copyrightable as they are for utilitarian communication uses
- i_monk0
neowe is totally right, they don't look anything like each other.
- neowe0
the flip flops drips and slides are all a bit different, the inspiration here is obvious but original work was done outside the inspiration so it's unique, therefore not a rip
- that's probably why the Europeans like itmcmillions
- niceneowe