Clogs’ album
“Bad artists copy. Great artists steal.”
Posted by HvassHannibal on March 30th 2010 in Other
Apparently that’s how Picasso felt about copying people’s work. These examples below are from some Danish designers who have been a little more than inspired by our work without linking to us or indicating where the inspiration came from.
Don’t get us wrong: We are more than happy that people can be inspired by our work! But instead of making a copy, why not add a twist, give it something new – in which case it would be both fun and interesting to have people contact us and show us new results that draw on the same ideas as we have worked with. But to stumble upon copies displayed on other designers’ websites, as if they were their own with no credit whatsoever, is not fun at all. And in these two examples the designers haven’t even bothered to at least change the format. In fact some details are so similar, that we find it is beyond doubt what’s going on…
What do you think? Is it ok to copy, and where do you draw the line? It would be great to get some responses on this topic.
Comments for “Bad artists copy. Great artists steal.”
lcs | March 31, 2010 at 9:26 am
Wow. I can’t believe how flagrantly they’ve vulgarized your work. It’s shameful when things like this happen, it leaves such a bad taste in your mouth…surely some kind of action can be taken against these people?
HvassHannibal | March 31, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Thanks for comments! One of them has apologized very sincerely, and it seems the work was done in a very innocent context. Which we think is totally fine, as long as it stays a private matter – and as such we don’t really feel angry about this. But obviously it’s a bit offending to find this kind of work published online.
and if it's real | March 31, 2010 at 4:21 pm
This is a very sad example of people with a massive lack of creativity. It’s very much okay to be inspired by your work, but to steal it bluntly like it has been done here is beyond belief
Jon | April 8, 2010 at 9:39 pm
Jean-Luc Godard said, “It’s not where you take things from, it’s where you take them to.”
I agree with that philosophy, but the result needs to be different. The result should be either built upon or broken down from the original idea. Those copies are blatantly obvious and were taken in no unique direction whatsoever.
You are lucky to catch it, most of the time it’s not recognized.
Alf | April 9, 2010 at 3:04 pm
Cant you guys tell us who did it. If they dont feel they ripped you off then a link is no problem. ;)
benjamin | April 9, 2010 at 3:48 pm
hh
this is outrageous.
i think alot of people who get into this copy mode are trying to grasp @ making something of their own. usually younger (hopefully).
have fun in china!
sincerely,
_b
HvassHannibal | April 13, 2010 at 10:37 am
Alf: Well… we are guessing they won’t be doing it again… :-) And the artwork has been moved from both of their websites, so we feel no need to reveal anyone.
Anyway! We thought it was a fun story to share, a bit of excitement in the office…
Eva | May 13, 2010 at 12:40 pm
whoa, that’s shocking. I can imagine someone wanting to learn the technique, but not giving any props to the original designers is really bad.
David Mc Nish | May 14, 2010 at 9:08 am
This is a totally rip off. I would feel so embarris!
eric tabuena | June 15, 2010 at 11:31 am
1-With regards to the geometrical composition my position is the guys did not copy but rather took inspiration. Because at the end of the day the geometrical composition has been explored by almost every artist, artisans, what have you etc. all throughout the centuries…so meaning in this category even your stuff is not at all original but rather a rehash of the old stuff.
2- on the second artwork, the way it was done, cut-out or whatever you call it might be your original, but the process or the method is already have been done and nothing new. And even then in terms of originality of style the shape of the silos are very regular, I’ve seen a lot of illustrators or illustrations using thesame visual imagery that you are using on your artwork.
I belive originality is when picasso and braque coined cubism. and when pollock did the drip, thats original. Is yours grounbreaking? No offense guys just expressing my opinion.
Rasmus | June 15, 2010 at 2:56 pm
Dear Eric
your post is annoying
your arguments are weak
and where in the blog post above (or anywhere else) does Hvass&Hannibal claim to be groundbreaking or original artists on the same level as Picasso and Pollock?
If you think the examples in the blogpost are OK and fair and not copies, then I feel sad for you.
- no offense
sarah | March 30, 2010 at 9:31 pm
WOW, never seen such blatant copies before. its like somebody stole your files or something! no trail, executed at dawn. death to thieves.