4 ms·
"Nothing too convincing for any side." You seriously believe that a Gang of Plagiarists might possibly have copied Jon's work? Um... I don't know how to respon
by davidmathers 18y ago
"Nothing too convincing for any side."
You seriously believe that a Gang of Plagiarists might possibly have copied Jon's work? Um... I don't know how to respond to that.
The side by side comparisons: http://www.thelogofactory.com/logo_blog/stock.html http://www.thelogofactory.com/logo_blog/stock.html
- trominos 18y agoI agree that Jon appears to be in the wrong here. But that would imply that he intentionally ripped off a bunch of artists, then decided to go to court over it (and almost definitely lose) and to start a witch hunt by pushing a blatantly false account of the whole thing in what I'm sure will amount to libel. That's almost as crazy as the possibility that his work was independently ripped off by multiple artists. I haven't thought that much about this -- is there a scenario I'm missing? The situation really makes no sense at all.
- davidmathers 18y agoAre you sure he decided to go to court? I thought he just made a blog post claiming persecution and asking for help.
- jambalaya 18y agoWhile taking in $1800 in donations...the plot thickens!
- Confusion 18y agoThere may not actually be a Gang of Plagiarists, because Stock Art may as well have made all those people up. Seems like a smart thing to do if your intention is fraud on this scale. I have no reason to assume it is the case, because from leaning towards 'Jon may be right', I'm not suddenly going to switch to an extrem 'Jon is a liar'.
- chairface 18y agoI have not verified this myself, but the people you're talking about apparently have reputations and have posted work outside of StockArt. It's highly unlikely that they were just "made up".