An artist is one thing, a commercial designer is another I think.

“Obviously, Mike/Logomotive is a much more handsome and likeable character than this ‘horrible fellow Dasche’ but that doesnt make his claims any more valid – when viewed in calm dispassionate terms does it?”
Is he? Have you seen him, lol! ??

I’d suggest that although Mikes claims aren’t any more valid, you don’t hear Joseph09 on the first forum coming forward to complain of theft so that does seem to imply that the design is indeed Mikes, otherwise wouldn’t the other ‘first’ (Joseph09) designer complain?

The whole incidence regardless of what the real story is, is a very good cautionary tale, which is why I’m pleased to report on it. It just shows why it’s so important to try your best not to steal other people’s design work.

I can see what you are saying that he should be more mature and hire an attorney instead of entering into Internet defamation, but not everyone can afford an attorney, and if he is indeed the original designer, that then leaves him little option but to use other means to force Dache and Artfoxs hand in removing the design.

Don’t forget he did give them at least two weeks before it all got ugly, which is plenty of time. Personally I would have given them about a three days.

I don’t think this will do much damage to Mikes name personally. Also he may be like myself and gets little trade from other designers/developers. Nearly all of my project work comes direct from the business owner and thus if this is the case for Mike, most ‘ordinary non designer folk’ wouldn’t even know all about this spectacle to decide they don’t want to hire him because of it.

Interviewing Artfox? Lol, hmmm, methinks they’d rather this all just went away now.

Isn’t that why we labor and give birth to our creations so that we can set them free?

Sure there (may) be a punitive effect and fear of being publicly shamed/called out – but what of the risk of defaming one person’s character over another’s?
Obviously, Mike/Logomotive is a much more handsome and likeable character than this ‘horrible fellow Dasche’ but that doesnt make his claims any more valid – when viewed in calm dispassionate terms does it?

Dasch’s logo –>looks like a rip from Mike/Logomotive–>Which in turn looks stolen from –>Joseph09
I really think you should put all three up there – As it would be a good cautionary tale.

What it meant for me, as a developer and having oversight on many 200k plus IT projects, I would NEVER hire Mike/LogoMotive for ANYTHING. I know now, having seen his portfolio 1st hand, that it is pretty darn good. I know also, looking at his site, that his rates are reasonable. but I also know, based on the traffic of this incident, that Mike is passionate (both in a good AND bad way), immature (in a bad way) and has a lot of “internet nut job friends” ready to defame and slander at the slightest whiff of impropriety or sleighted treatment.

Disputes happen all the time – this incident is so incredible because it is exactly the kind of ‘grey’ ‘not-clear-cut’ situations that demand caution. We already saw that there were few claims to exclusivity, and yet, despite all they both knew, Mike and his friend perpetrated this internet slandering/shaming/defamation debacle – AND PERSISTED EVEN WHEN ARTFOX TRIED TO SETTLE, FAIRLY.

Since disputes happen all the time, whats to say that if I hired Mike and he was in disagreement over something, he and his nut-job friends wouldn’t try to damage me like they damaged Artfox?
Instead of entering on these futile internet vendettas, they should cooperatively pay for an attorney to handle their disputes, or, simply, GROW UP.

The whole thing is silly/sad in so many ways –

I would love if you actually took this story a bit further, maybe interviewing Artfox, and see what their take is, from the other side?

You feel it does the design world no good, but to be honest I think there would be a huge amount more plagiarism going around if the design world didn’t going into a huge tizzy at any whiff of it. This sort of thing aids as a ‘cautionary’ tale for those who may be tempted.

What would deter would be design thieves if they didn’t think there reputations might be at stake if they steal designs? I feel this behavior actually serves to offer significant protection for designers, it’s why they band together and do it.

With regards to his refusal to be bought off it seems that Mike is quite proud and precious about his Artfox design (he did say it was his favourite) and doesn’t want to be paid of so it can be buried and the other design used instead, each to their own I guess. Personally I’d have sold it for a very good price, but then I am a design ho lol

It’s been a good conversation with you, thank you for adding an interesting debate to this blog

Amanda

My point still is as valid as it stands.
It hasnt been refuted in any way.

The circumstances of the previous links – that you yourself saw for yourself, do show that there is prior art existing that matches BOTH efforts – inadvertently perhaps, but matching all the same, which makes the current tempest moot.

if you didnt fan the flames with inflammatory “burn the thief” rhetoric, well good for you! If I implied that you were one of the crazed villagers with pitchforks (and you have no pitchfork) then I am wrong then!

I am not a designer, although I know what I like I have no website to offer you and I have no SEO axe to grind to invite you or Google anywhere.
My position is the same as before, this stupid tempest does the design world no good.
I would not be so presumptious to suggest you make a statement on it, I suspect you already have or at least share my opinion on this, I doubt we disagree that much.
Anyway, the story is ended, Artfox made LogoMotive an offer for the rights to his version which he declined saying that if he sold them the rights to HIS version, they couldn’t use the other version (yeah, I said WTF too) So Artfox ends up reprinting whatever they printed and developing a new logo/branding, possibly by the same guy (Dasche)

A totally silly and wasted tale.

Why the hiding Mark?

Now with relation to my own personal conduct in things I have learned of in recent days and reported upon, you will note that I said ‘apparent theft’ in my blog, I’ve not once claimed to know for sure if Dache has stolen the design or not because of course I can’t possibly know.

I’ll admit based on circumstances thus far it’s looked pretty damning though and have said as much also in some of my comments. You will not find one of my own personal comments claiming that Dache has definitely stolen Mike of Logomotives design, I’ve merely reported on the events and links to the disputes in actually quite a neutral fashion.

You will also note I’ve been very respectful in my comments and in no way abusive to Dache, indeed I’ve implied on a number of occasions now that this could all very well be accidental duplication. I’m always happy to give the benefit of the doubt.

My main criticism has been Daches failure at one point to respond to allegations and commented that it is in fact this that is damaging his reputation (because it makes him ‘seem’ guilty even if that may not be true), as of course all ‘theft’ claims are going to be alleged only until proven.

Which is why I’ve afforded Mike the same benefit of the doubt, I’m not calling anyone a thief for sure with only a few images as evidence. Of course these constitute little in the way of real evidence.

My attempts to give Mike benefit of the doubt (which is the same benefit of doubt I gave Dache) is nothing to do with me being ‘friends’ with anyone.

It might interest you to know that I’m not a member of Logopond as far as I’m aware unless I signed up years ago and forgot about it, have never used the website, and have never spoken to Dache or Mike before in my life and never heard of their businesses before either. They are completely unknown to be until I heard of these events and read all the comments.

My posting of this blog is nothing to do with sticking up for friends, I don’t know Dache, I don’t know Mike, and I don’t know Slovenian Designer, you may note he didn’t even know my name either until I told him. This blog is simply a report on a potential case of design plagiarism, which interests me and no doubt my readers also.

I think anyone would be hard pushed to describe my comments and indeed my initial blog, which merely reports on events, as ‘Internet nut job’ behavior.

So please don’t include me in the ‘you all’ statements about abusive comments and threats as on ‘this blog’ there is no such activity, probably the reason why Bolidea felt it safe to comment here.

I also don’t personally feel you have put yourself in the best position for critising those that have been abusive to Dache.

I had to remove some comments you posted earlier due to their abusive/rude nature and even what I’ve left has an abusive tone and wording still….. so whilst you seek to deride those ‘Internet nut jobs’ who are concerned about a potential plagiarism in a community they trust in, look to your own behavior and comments also and think about how that looks to potential clients.

You are swearing, and ranting and shouting in capitals for goodness sake, what makes you think that you ‘don’t’ look like an Internet nut job? People in glass houses and all that.

c’mon now.

Really.

Basically you are saying the equivalent of.. “show me the facts I base my opinion on EVIDENCE, then when faced with contrary evidence…. you discount it!” Dont take the critique personally, it is a decidedly human trait. We only have to look at immediate history and at how the whole ‘evidence of weapons of mass destruction and justification for war” thing worked out to see what cherrypicking evidence gets us.

The facts are as they are seen, and are to be taken at face value.
There is existing PRIOR images that match the Redfox/Artfox logotype.

Mike (Logomotion) “is as clearly a thief” regarding this logo as Dasche is!
Of course, Mike swore to God that he hadnt seen the prior work before and was not influenced by it in his design, and of course , We Like Mike, so all is well.

Out come the anecdotes ….”oh yes, I’ve run into that many a time meself…”

Look, after all is said, done and thrashed out, it may well be that this Dasche guy is some lowlife scumbag
But ultimately, this issue isnt about Mike, Dasche, Redfox/Artfox it is about YOU what do YOU stand for?

Right now, we can certainly verify that Artfox has taken a hit – if they have made /ordered stationary, mouse pads, goodies for clients, T-Shirts, designed banner advertising at great cost only to have to throw it away?

You guys arent operating or thinking as business people look at this:
http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/13205.html The Watchmen Movie ..
http://comicsworthreading.com/2009/01/16/watchmen-movie-dispute-settled-fox-gets-payoff/ Dispute settled,

See, there was a dispute over the movie. Fox just quietly notified Warner and worked on their legal options.
Now, even if you ARE a lawyer in your own right, filing a lawsuit in defense of your rights is expensive – still, Lawyers will take your case on commission on occasion -IF YOUR CASE IS IRONCLAD.
It’s clear to me at least, that Mike did not have prior exclusivity to this “Triangle fox idea” and thus, his claims have no merit.

This name calling, slander, defamation, extortion and threats is unsightly, unprofessional and distasteful. That business people could collapse down to this rabble rousing behavior is just plain shocking.

It is quite likely that if were the project manager of my companies internet division, about to tender out a 400k public website, intranet and company rebranding campaign, that I may want to avoid any of the lunatic fringe who got stirred up by this and not have them work on any projects the company is involved in?
You think I wouldnt do even some limited due diligence to see who the hell we are working with?

Companies dont want plagiarists, but THEY DONT WANT INTERNET NUT-JOBS EITHER!!
If y’all can go off half cocked and abusive like this, threatening a yet to be launched company – OVER AN ISSUE NOT YET RIPE NOR PROVEN – should anyone do financial dealings with you where their company reputation would be at stake?

what if we had an honest disagreement over some deliverable – we hold that our contract allows for 5 design revisions (we dont count the first submission as a revision- but you do) are we to expect an internet grassroots slander campaign????

jeezus christ people

we gotta be BETTER THAN THIS …or else
…..

Logomotives posted their Red Fox design on Logopond on Oct 2008 – http://logopond.com/gallery/detail/41400

Yet an earlier image of a similar concept of the same name (Red Fox) exists in Sep 2008 – http://forum.theovc.org/viewtopic.php?id=258

Some comments from Dache can also be now viewed on the Logopond discussion of this matter.

Just because a design shows up in Sep, that isn’t any evidence that the OVC designer is the original designer. Mike may have only posted it in Oct, but that doesn’t mean that was it’s first public airing/not seen before.

Obviously we don’t know for sure, but what I find rather strange is the lack of profile information for every single person at the OVC forum, or even forum signatures to their websites. That is unusual, is that a real forum conversation or a mocked up one?

Amanda

turns out it’s a rip.