Open letter to Leo Burnett
- Started
- Last post
- 56 Responses
- GeorgesII0
ooohhh the witch burning has already been called off
:(
- chossy0
If Leo Burnette own it then tough shit and also shut the fuck up.
It is a compliment that it is a copy of your work. You did a great job by producing it in a short time for a small budget. They wanted to make it again with more money and show it to more people. If I were you I would be proud of that and it would be a massive talking point at any meetings you had with other clients. You can talk about how they re-made it after your initial success at the awards ceremony. You didn't do the new version... because you were super busy and are really upset about that but were happy with what was produced and spoke to Leo Burnett about it afterwards congratulating them on successfuly reproducing your initial work. That's the best marketing you could have achieved from this situation.
- If anyone wants to hire me for some awesome typing send me an email.chossy
- good pointsmonospaced
- the production company is just pissed they didn't get to copy themselves and someone else did. they gambled as a smaller company trying to get a big company and lost, and now are sour about it.
pepe
- clearThoughts0
Guess that's the way this fucked up industry works.
I've had the same thing done over and over again.
- chossy0
Thing is though if Leo burnette own it etc. and all they got Asylum to do was execute it then... well tough shit Asylum. If however Asylum wrote and came up with the concept then Fuck Leo Burnett they are cunts.
SImple thing man, I got a joiner to put in some doors for me, he did an ok job but I was never satisfied with it, so I got someone else to do the work again and I was satisfied with that work. At no point did I feel the need to tell the previous guy that I had just got the work re-done. This is all assuming that Asylum did not come up with the concept and script of course.
- SteveJobs0
the second bigger production piece looked far better and was better executed. one man's opinion, of course.
and based on asylums offering i question whether asylum could have produced at that level even with a bigger budget.
also, the open letter was a bad PR move. i can't imagine any bigger agencies will feel safe doing business with asylum knowing they're more likely to vent their frustrations publicy. seriously, who does that?
- raf0
Interesting that they sneaked in what easily has an appearance of a blatant lie into their polite apology. It makes it sound like "because fy, you don't get this game".
- pepe0
leo burnett shouldn't have responded.
- kingkong0
they havent
- monospaced0
... and ... scene.
Fade out.
- tOki0
All of you guys complaining about if Leo Burnett hired Asylum then it's totally fair - FYI most agencies retain copyright of their work, as well as ownership of the working files. The transaction is merely a license to use said work.. this is to protect their investment and any knowledge or trade secrets associated with it eg. to stop people taking their concepts and creating derivative works. It's anti-competitive sure, but this is a good example where they, the small guy, gets fucked around by the big guy and miss out on what they deem to be work that should of gone to them.
This kind of thing happens all the time - whilst Leo Burnett probably haven't broken any kind of contract they've definitely not played particularly fair to the smaller shop who seemingly helped them out. It highlights how business in general can be pretty douchey if anything..
- animatedgif0
At least the other agency didn't steal their characters from a Japanese comic strip.
- Peter0
> Thing is though if Leo burnette own it etc. and all they got Asylum to do was execute it then... well tough shit Asylum. If however Asylum wrote and came up with the concept then Fuck Leo Burnett they are cunts.
From their apology it seems they came up with "the script":
“Every year Leo Burnett makes a low budget film for the RMHC gala dinner. Asylum did a wonderful job with our script and the client was so pleased, that they wanted to invest in the script and shoot again for cinema. Consequently two other production companies pitched for it with our script without seeing the film that Asylum produced. Our apologies go to Asylum for not informing them that we were talking to other production companies.”
Whether that script included visuals cues, style and camera handling I wouldn't know and could only speculate.
From their need to include the line "...without seeing the film" I'd figure it didn't.
And really, who in their right mind would not show the initial version if they were to remake it? That's pure bullshit, but I digress.Either way, included or not, it seems like a halfass apology that does little for Asylum and serves more to distance themselves [LB] from any connections to plagiarism by shifting the focus to a normal business decision. One that many business owners can relate to.
imho.- I agree; big guys shitting on the little guys because they can.lukus_W2
- BusterBoy0
Unfortunately for Asylum, that'll be the last time they hear from Leo Burnett...and probably any other large Agency for that matter.
- monolith0
why are people all getting bent out of shape about this?
Let's put it in simple terms.
Leo hires the studio to create this short film as a pitch most likely. They pay the guys making it thus own the rights to the work. That's why they pay them for.
The client, in this case Ronald McDonald House charity loved the work and they went with it. Leo took the video and redid it with a bigger budget not hiring the original team for who knows what reason (time restraints, previous partnership with another studio or for whatever the reason).
Leo had the right to make this decision. The fact that Asylum guys were butt-hurt (and I understand it's disappointing) for not getting the big budget redux, it's at full discretion of Leo who will get the big budget gig.
Yes, I get that Asylum guys worked hard trying to get the gig but hey, life sucks sometimes and you don't go whining to everyone for not getting the big budget work.
To go open like that is very unprofessional. Leo is under no obligation (quite the opposite) to promote Asylum in making this video.
I am not defending big agencies as they can be sleaze-balls but if you are not aware that the work might go to someone else than you shouldn't be in the business to begin with.
Now, if Leo had these guys do the work as a pitch and not pay them, then rip it off, that would be a different thing but from everything that's been said that's not the case.
This type of shit happens all the time. A big agency finds small creative team and pays them ok money to do shit for them. What they do after it isn't anyone's concern but Leo's.
If you don't want this to happen, try to work with clients directly instead of agencies. Agencies have been and always will be middle men.
- toodee0
Looking at their showreel I wouldn't be confident Asylum could make something as slick as the second film. Why should Burnett risk bollocksing up their relationship with McDonalds just to give a small agency a chance.
