Concept theft or "inspiration"

[xpressions]

I don't know if this is the correct place to post this. If not, please move it to the appropriate area.

This is one of those topics that everyone has their own views on. I ask, when does inspiration cross over into concept theft? Yes, this is prompted by one of my latest entries. I don't mind inspiring someone else, but, what happens when the inspiration is so huge that it leaves you nowhere to go with your original first draft?

[LeadMagnet]

Well, the way i see it is i try to change enough of it so that it's not too similar to what it's based on. Improve it wherever possible.
Alot of it comes down to intent really i think. If you're changing it only enough to avoid a lawsuit, i'd call that concept theft.
If you're really trying to change it to avoid concept theft and make it your own, well, then i wouldn't call it theft. But if you can't change it enough to consider it to be your own, at least contact the original creator if possible and ask if he/she minds.

[Carla-Jay]

There's a few bits already posted that might interest you

http://www.graphic-design-forum.com/...searchid=35341

[Arkady]

If you talk about changing things then you're already beyond the limits of inspiration. I can only really relate this to photography, but if for example I was inspired by the work of Henri Cartier-Bresson then I might take my camera and photograph the life and lives of the ordinary people on the streets. If on the other hand I went in search of a large puddle in the hope of photographing someone stepping over it, then this is not being inspired this is mimickry. Strictly speaking this may not be viewed as plagiarism if I don't try to recreate Bressons original photograph too closely (i.e. I change enough things in it) and it certainly isn't copyright infringement. But the fact remains, that it is at the very least, faithless and weak.

[D856C]

I think it would be a handy distinction to make copying different from stealing. Copying is merely aping one or two other designs, usually visibly doing it in an inferior way. This "imitation" isn't flattery -- it's embarrassing.

Stealing is when you take elements and suggestions from five, ten or more different designs. Rather than make a cut-and-paste collage of elements, the new design fuses them into a unique new vision which may improve on each element borrowed.

To illustrate both Microsoft and Apple borrow ideas from others. Microsoft copies, Apple steals.

A great article on this concept is Good Designers Copy, Great Designers Steal. I wouldn't even call it stealing when you improve on the ideas, you're borrowing to give something back which is greater than what was borrowed.

A good rule of thumb: If you feel compelled to ask -- you really don't need an answer. You already know what the answer is.

Kevin Airgid Uncovers a Web Design Trend: Monkey See Monkey Do. Monkey-see monkey-do is the inferior result of copying, and it is rampant in Web 2.0 style -- which rapidly devolved into web design cliches.

It has gotten so trite and formulaic, you can eliminate the designers altogether and write up a Web 2.0 design generator script - of which there are many.

Most people copy because they admire a design and want to be admired themselves. This is a fine goal. However, when you're posted on Pirated Sites or called a cliche, the goal is defeated.

i was told by a tutor at uni that to avoid copyright issues you have 2 prove that 80% of your design is your own or that 80% of an image has been changed from the original!

so im guessing that 20% can be inspiration but 21% is theft!

eg: althouh a blatent rip off theres not much adidas can do about the copyright because theyre similar but not similar enough!

[Arkady]

There is a difference between morality and legaility. In terms of copyright infringement there is a very clear framework. If I take a photograph of a scene within which there is displayed a piece of copyrighted artwork, then the piece in question may not fill more than 20% of the frame of my photograph otherwise I have infringed the copyright of the author of the other piece. That has nothing to do with a designer who when emabarking on a new design starts by recreating all or part of someone elses work and then sets about modifying it enough to counter claims of plaigarism or piracy.

[D856C]

Also keep in mind if the opinion is the work is a blatant rip-off -- even if technically non-infringing -- does it work for branding, promotion?

Does the reputation of being a rip-off work when you're looking for vendors of promotion partners? If the work becomes known as a blatant rip-off, even if that discovery happens later, then that becomes the branding ...not whatever good associations there are for the original source.

Copying is like a hidden trap which has the potential to destroy marketing.

Once you think through what you're doing and what the objective is, copying isn't the quick fix it seems to be. Would you actually buy the shirt above? If you're a startup seeking funding, and all anyone can do when seeing this logo is think "rip-off," does that work for your objective? If you're in any kind of client meeting and someone hands you a business card or stationery with that logo on it, do you think about the company -- or Adidas? Are you thinking this is an honest company using this logo, or someone you're going to have to watch like a hawk?

Finally what if everybody does this? You may find you blend right into the background of even worse disappear altogether.

[Toon]

Agree with this 100% a major concern now a days is with the use of the internet your reputation can be in tatters faster than ever before if you run the risk of ripping ideas from other people. Search Engines read it all.

[james]

Originally Posted by D856C

Finally what if everybody does this? You may find you blend right into the background of even worse disappear altogether.

That's a lot of spirals! One thing is certain, and that's that creating a truly unique and original logo is getting hard.