Crowdsourcing: Arguments Against
- Started
- Last post
- 45 Responses
- boobs
I'd like to develop a list of arguments that can actually be used in conversations with clients to beat down this awful, heinous practice of crowdsourcing, especially logos. I wrote this up, to send along to a client. Please post other useful arguments that can be made to clients against this awful practice.
Here:
It's obvious that many, many of the logos on crowdsourced sites are generated from other existing logos and clip art designs, and that the "designers" submit the same designs over and over again to different companies. This exposes the client of crowdsourcing to several potential problems, some of which can be quite serious.
One potential problem is that the client's logo will end up exactly like someone else's. On a crowdsourced site, the client has no real practical assurance that the logo in question has not been used for other clients, or that it will not be used again for still further clients. In fact, the fact that a particular logo is seen as a "winner," will probably insure that it is copied over and over again. So this creates the very real problem that the clients logo will not be unique.
Since there's no way to insure that the logo is, or will be, unique, there is a further problem that, consequently, the logo cannot be (practically) copyrighted or trademarked. This may seem like a silly problem for a small company, but it is actually very real. If anyone comes along and likes the client's logo, they'll be entirely free to copy it. So, if the company is successful, their logo and brand will be free game for anyone else to use however they like.
The other very real problem is that the client's logo, since it is likely to be sold to someone else, could result in litigation down the line. Let's say Designer A copies your logo and sells it to Company B. Company B copyrights it, or trademarks it. Then they see "their" logo on your company, and sue you. Legal bills await! What do you do? You've both been sold the same thing, which should be unique. And you're both stuck.
Now, the crowdsourcing company may have some legalese on their site about how all the logos have to be unique, and not copied, etc., etc. But the people that are submitting logos are not necessarily ethical people. And many of them are not. It's obvious from a few hours examining crowdsourcing sites that the same logos are being used over and over, copied from the same clip art templates. "Designers" apparently go from crowdsource site to crowdsource site, posting similar designs over and over again. How could it be any other way? The majority of their designs will not be "winners." Much of the work they will do will be for free. In order to make a living they have to give the least amount of attention they can to the most "clients" they can, to try to hit the jackpot with a winner here and there to make some money.
There is an old Latin expression. Caveat Emptor. Let the buyer beware. Purchasing is crowdsourced logo may be opening the client's company to very real problems.
On the other hand, a professional designer will not be using templates or clipart. They will doing utterly original artwork. Completely unique to the client.
This gives the client very real protection, that is important in today's business world. Using a professional deesigner, your mark will be, first and foremost, unique. Which means it can be copyrighted. It can be trademarked. And the copyrights and trademarks will stand up legally. Using a professional designer, the clients gets a very real piece of intellectual property that, if need be, can be protected against all comers.
This is a very real concern! Think about what our business landscape would look like today if trademarks and logos from famous companies did not have these protections, and did not have control of their logos. Their would be no value in brands like Coca-Cola, Mercedes Benz, Chanel or Ferrari. Any car could be a "Ferrari," and "Ferrari" would be meaningless, and so on, and so on.
Caveat emptor. Be sure you realize all the risks you expose yourself to when dealing with crowdsourced design work--especially logos, which are at the very, very heart of your branding!
- vaxorcist0
at one gig, we talked a client out of using a royalty-free stock photo in an important branding-identity ad campaign by showing them a magazine where the same stock photo was used in 2 completely different ads...
Also, a non-profit I once did work for was sued by a major insurance company because the insurance company felt the logos were too similar, the non-profit had to redo all their collatoral, branding,signage, t-shirts, backpacks, etc.. they were a major high-school after-school program, so they had 10,000 T-shirts...
Making this stuff clear, and not apparently self-justifying hot-air is not easy, sometimes requires really obvious visual cues....
- an insurance company suing a non-profit? that's messed up.SteveJobs
- boy I like the visual clue route!!!manonthestreet
- yes... the insurance company threatened to sue, not sure if they really did, very nasty letters....vaxorcist
- akrok0
crowdsourcing must be bad for the economy. as workers has no money to spend.
the whole key on making things go round. is to spend. (more or less).
- manonthestreet0
boobs, I read that and it sounds a bit sales-y. I believe and agree with what you are saying 100%.
I would be a lot more direct and brief, and back it up with the same conviction that you actually feel about the subject:
If you are considering crowdsourcing your brand identity I would respectfully like to withdraw from consideration for this project. My rate/fees/costs extend to responsibilities far greater than just delivering 'artwork'.
Then list bullets.
- Josev0
I would like to see a discussion within the design community about this topic. There was a thread on the Brand New site where half of the commenters supported spec work. I disagree with it but if someone had a compelling argument about why it's a good thing for the future of design I may buy into it. Usually the argument is that it allows younger designers to get portfolio pieces.
- I dont think we're doing a good job of showing the ignorance behind spec thinking, even within our own profession.Josev
- dbloc0
horrible logos
- manonthestreet0
Hey, it's got it's place.....no one here should even try to compete with it.
- i am sure people have lost their jobs and it lower the level of quality and salaries in general.akrok
- akrok0
"Usually the argument is that it allows younger designers to get portfolio pieces."
yeah, they say that to make it sounds less bad, even do it's still horse shit.
- NONEIS0
You could try pointing out that it undermines the work of people like YOU and the community at large by taking these tasks away from experienced designers that depend on these sorts of branding jobs to make a living. In other words, "stop hurting my industry".
- Dodecahedron0
Crowdsourcing should be implemented within the entire design, branding, marketing process more often as opposed to being the entire process itself. Its an ineffective model alone but seems like its getting a bad rap because no one is using it properly.
- *thinks about it for a second - poops pantsmanonthestreet
- *gets mopDodecahedron
- thanks. It wasn't you...just had to poop.manonthestreet
- k... clean it up thenDodecahedron
- +1, works well within a company with many users a la foursquare or other user-generated database driven sitessilentpost
- exactly it has place within the new business landscape.Dodecahedron
- Josev0
What would "using it properly" look like? This is the kind of information I'm looking for. Convince me.
- This is where we start to use our imaginations.Dodecahedron
- exactly...dbloc
- I think you could look to the art and film world for how it could used for more design oriented projects.Dodecahedron
- Same with the general culture online and how it fits into the company's identity. Wholeistic appraachDodecahedron
- Josev0
"This is where we start to use our imaginations.'...
Okay, please share some of your ideas
- invite people to submit small simple illustrations that you compile into a larger piece.monNom
- nobody get's hurt and everyone can claim ownership.monNom
- < "Communism"abettertomorrow
- lol
the prize will be vodka!monNom
- dbloc0
The first comparison that comes to mind is the extremely poorly paid factory workers overseas.
- pumping out shit qualitydbloc
- whats different from shit quality out of the crowd vs shit quality out of a cheap factory design company?Dodecahedron
- The designers get paid a fair wage.dbloc
- no, no. that's if you win. so, of the 500 designers. only 1 got 300 bucks.akrok
- attentionspan0
While i absolutely loathe the idea of crowdsourcing, i feel like your arguments might be flawed in some cases.
I dont know the size of your client, but really how much does it mean for a small local business to have a "unique mark" most of them are never going to spend money on real "branding" except maybe a few local ads in some local news paper / ad words etc...
My point is they are not going to make any money on having a brilliant identity which noone gets to see.
- Josev0
"whats different from shit quality out of the crowd vs shit quality out of a cheap factory design company?"
So the argument FOR it is that there is already low-quality work being produced. So why not put even more downward pressure on the profession. Brilliant.
- Dodecahedron0
no thats not my argument for it thats a question...theres a difference. My argument is something else... I am not arguing for crowdsourcing as you are talking about it, its obviously flawed as I stated and everyone else has, I am arguing for a more holistic approach to using crowdsourcing.
- like. you fix my car. i make you a logo?akrok
- no... like think outside the box or something. Its not the business model I'm talking about its the creative process.Dodecahedron
- i see.akrok
- Josev0
and I asked you what that approach would look like. You have no details to share about what that would look like? How that would work within the market? How you would avoid exploitive practices by greedy people? The details matter, I'm sorry.
- I refuse to do your thinking for you. If I told you I'd have to kill you anyway.Dodecahedron
- actually, you seem to refuse to do any thinking for yourself. You just offer platitudesJosev
- kDodecahedron
- i don't work on spec sorryDodecahedron
- there you go :)timeless
- cannonball19780
tldr
- silentpost0
using crowdsourcing properly: having users add content to a global database a la foursquare. Everybody benefits: database is populated for foursquare, and many users can check in to that place
improperly: what your entire post has been about
- <this and what harlequino saidDodecahedron
- I find this slightly unconvincing, not because I disagree, but just because it describes every websiteabettertomorrow
- i.e., Wikipedia, YouTube, Discogs, etc...is it all crowdsourcing?abettertomorrow
- yessilentpost
- i think crowdsourcing applies to any website that can't survive without its communitysilentpost
- harlequino0
It can be an effective part of a much larger puzzle. It's been very successful on a couple occasions for fast, cheap concept generation when resources were stretched. Concepts were sifted, refined, then executed by "real" staff or contractors.
So yes, use your imagination, and bring good management and planning into it as well.