Shirt.Woot

jack50n wrote:I can't believe I'm even posting this - BUT - my 4 year-old is a serious broccoli-holic - he literally eats it off the shelves @ the grocery store. If anyone has bought a kid's shirt (size 4 or 6) that they want to turn over, I'll gladly take it off your hands - via paypal for $20 (heaven help me).

You can reach me @ boaterboyct at yahoo .com

Thanks in advance for your consideration!

wait till tomorrow, they sell for 15 from the site...

jack50n wrote:I can't believe I'm even posting this - BUT - my 4 year-old is a serious broccoli-holic - he literally eats it off the shelves @ the grocery store. If anyone has bought a kid's shirt (size 4 or 6) that they want to turn over, I'll gladly take it off your hands - via paypal for $20 (heaven help me).

You can reach me @ boaterboyct at yahoo .com

Thanks in advance for your consideration!

As of midnight CST you can buy your own from the link in my signature for $15.

jack50n wrote:I can't believe I'm even posting this - BUT - my 4 year-old is a serious broccoli-holic - he literally eats it off the shelves @ the grocery store. If anyone has bought a kid's shirt (size 4 or 6) that they want to turn over, I'll gladly take it off your hands - via paypal for $20 (heaven help me).

You can reach me @ boaterboyct at yahoo .com

Thanks in advance for your consideration!

You can buy the shirt for $15 tomorrow.

Baroccoli Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_j9F1vz_y50

caspianta wrote:if this isn't a quote that says, "we just want to print a bunch of shirts that appeal to different folks in order to move the most quantity regardless of the quality of those designs", i don't know what is.

That quote really irked me, too, probably even more than the copyright issue and the fact that she wasn't punished for not disclosing the issue to them beforehand. Cheesesandwich has been printed here at least 8 times now. I don't think she needs any coaxing to stay interested or keep participating.

Sure, woot is very competitive, we artists know that, but I'm not convinced that it's a fair competition. An artist, used loosely, who has been printed at least 7 times already, gets another print on a high-volume day when several people I know of who have only been printed once or a few times or NOT AT ALL by woot (but who consistently submit original and quality works to the derbies and other sites) have recently submitted designs to be considered for dailies and have been turned down. I have seen some of these designs. They are awesome and different and would appeal to wooters. Those people would love to get the exposure that Cheese did today with the woot-off going on. Instead their designs were passed over, and copyrighted, live-traced broccoli got the primo spot. Does Joel really think treatment like this will get "as many artists interested and participating as possible"? That logic escapes me.

Perhaps I am just bitter because I submitted a daily about a month ago that I spent an entire weekend working on only to have it not be picked up by woot. (To their defense, they were really nice about it.) I thought it was turned down because they had better prospects, but now I'm quite disappointed that something requiring so little effort got chosen instead.

ditto, my feelings exactly.

ansharp wrote:That quote really irked me, too, probably even more than the copyright issue and the fact that she wasn't punished for not disclosing the issue to them beforehand. Cheesesandwich has been printed here at least 8 times now. I don't think she needs any coaxing to stay interested or keep participating.

Sure, woot is very competitive, we artists know that, but I'm not convinced that it's a fair competition. An artist, used loosely, who has been printed at least 7 times already, gets another print on a high-volume day when several people I know of who have only been printed once or a few times or NOT AT ALL by woot (but who consistently submit original and quality works to the derbies and other sites) have recently submitted designs to be considered for dailies and have been turned down. I have seen some of these designs. They are awesome and different and would appeal to wooters. Those people would love to get the exposure that Cheese did today with the woot-off going on. Instead their designs were passed over, and copyrighted, live-traced broccoli got the primo spot. Does Joel really think treatment like this will get "as many artists interested and participating as possible"? That logic escapes me.

Perhaps I am just bitter because I submitted a daily about a month ago that I spent an entire weekend working on only to have it not be picked up by woot. (To their defense, they were really nice about it.) I thought it was turned down because they had better prospects, but now I'm quite disappointed that something requiring so little effort got chosen instead.

I wish Sokowa was still around. I love how woot got around to that Daily they were chatting her up about back in July, and would love to see her reaction to all this.

I think of Chris Risse also, who has never been printed at woot. No clue how many dailies he's submit, but I know he could have easily been printed in either of the last two ed choice weeks. Same with Artulo, who is constantly HM'd, and has printed at DBH, Uneetee, and Teefury, but is not good enough for woot to print in dailies or derbies. He's been pretty obviously upset in here, and he should be. he's never live traced a copyrighted image on his 9th woot print. because he hasn't had a woot print.

Hell, I even think of new submitters like Drakxxx, who has gotten a number of HMs... will he get the same sort of shaft that others have? How about multiple HMer Montygog... has he been approached for a daily? They like him so much, yet won't print him... and then we have the 9th print this artist was associated with. What about months ago when eHalcyon was expressing his woes of trying for a daily. He's still only been printed once, and while I don't like his work, it's hand done. I'd think a daily from him would not only sell well, but would help fulfill the idea of introducing new artists into the fold.

Long story short, there is WAY more to this than simple "I don't like this" whining. It's a huge pattern of neglect. A couple wootoffs ago we had them reward a known art thief with a print. Today we get this issue. If anyone knows Todd Goldman, you should give him a call to get on board for a shirt here during a wootoff in 09.

And I'm still interested in knowing when the rights were bought.

Meh. This should show the derby regulars that adamantly stick to the rules to create original art are a dying breed. At least now they know where the rules can be bent. I can't wait to see some livetrace work by Cho! I bet he's good at PS filters...

This shirt is lucky it came out during a woot-off, because it's not very good.

I just got my randoms and they are size L but the L is curly, what does that mean?

The way how this copyright infringement was handled clearly demonstrated that someone's short term ego, someone's pet is more important than shirt.woot's long term brand association that of which he represents despite what some loyal contributors' opinion may be. And why does shirt.woot's representative keep dodging the inquiry of when was the copyright purchased? Where is that courage and integrity?

AdderXYU wrote:What about months ago when eHalcyon was expressing his woes of trying for a daily. He's still only been printed once, and while I don't like his work, it's hand done. I'd think a daily from him would not only sell well, but would help fulfill the idea of introducing new artists into the fold.

Awww. That warms my heart. Thanks Adder.

eHalcyon wrote:Awww. That warms my heart. Thanks Adder.

I'm just sayin'... if woot cares so much about giving new designers a chance to say "here's my work," why are there derby designers they have never printed, and why wouldn't they take a chance on someone who at the time never printed, and still only has done so once. Don't thank me. Joel said it himself. While defending a copyrighted live trace from a nine-time printer. Or maybe Joel meant that the guy on Google Images Result One got to show people his work. Another first!

One more hour til we officially never get a response as to when they paid for the rights.

Well, with this abuse of a copyright image.. I am thinking about just boycotting woot shirts until they come clean about the whole situation.

Needless to say, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth (worse than any broccoli would do).

AdderXYU wrote:I'm just sayin'... if woot cares so much about giving new designers a chance to say "here's my work," why are there derby designers they have never printed, and why wouldn't they take a chance on someone who at the time never printed, and still only has done so once. Don't thank me. Joel said it himself. While defending a copyrighted live trace from a nine-time printer. Or maybe Joel meant that the guy on Google Images Result One got to show people his work. Another first!

One more hour til we officially never get a response as to when they paid for the rights.

the very fact that he has posted on this thread says it all. case closed.

bluchez wrote:As of midnight CST you can buy your own from the link in my signature for $15.

Sincere thanks!

joelterrific wrote:
Oh, and the last thing on copyrighted images (since I KNOW this will come up in Derbies): <b> I will continue to enforce the rule that no one may use copyrighted or rights managed images as part of their design.</b> In the flurry of the derby, we don't have time to track down the specifics for those images and very often the contracts allow personal use, but not for commercial use. If the image/site does not expressly grant rights in public, we will reject the design.

Joel, just to be clear, the designer of the broccoli shirt _did_ clear with you beforehand the use of a copyrighted image? Most of us don't really take issue with the fact that the image was gotten from elsewhere, and I don't think most designers want to be able to use copyrighted images in their derby designs. We just want to know that you guys at woot weren't being tricked into buying rights for the image after-the-fact.

Sincere thanks for taking the time to post in the thread and address the concerns of your customers.

joelterrific wrote:
Oh, and the last thing on copyrighted images (since I KNOW this will come up in Derbies): <b> I will continue to enforce the rule that no one may use copyrighted or rights managed images as part of their design.</b> In the flurry of the derby, we don't have time to track down the specifics for those images and very often the contracts allow personal use, but not for commercial use. If the image/site does not expressly grant rights in public, we will reject the design.

I will probably regret getting into this, but after reading this thread, there are questions about the use of the copyrighted image that have not yet been answered. It's almost like listening to a politician skirt the issue, instead of giving a straight answer. Here are my questions...

1. When did shirt.woot become aware of the use of this copyrighted image? Was it before or after it was chosen to print?

2. If before, did the artist notify you that she used a copyrighted image when she submitted her design?

3. Are artists responsible for buying the rights to a copyrighted image should they decide to use one in a daily submission, or is it shirt.woot's responsibility?

I don't think we're going to get a straightforward answer if one hasn't been put out already. Woot is not going to publicly come out and say "hey, we messed up and had to buy the rights to that image because we trust the artists that submit daily work that is approved and didn't check beforehand". That sort of admission about being forced into purchasing commercial rights to an image, and/or any publicly acknowledged punishment such as a reduced initial payment or removal of royalties would also be publicly shaming the "artist" in question here, as well as looking really bad. Whether or not it happens behind the scenes is not clear, but publicly it's not going to happen.

artulo wrote:I don't think we're going to get a straightforward answer if one hasn't been put out already. Woot is not going to publicly come out and say "hey, we messed up and had to buy the rights to that image because we trust the artists that submit daily work that is approved and didn't check beforehand". That sort of admission about being forced into purchasing commercial rights to an image, and/or any publicly acknowledged punishment such as a reduced initial payment or removal of royalties would also be publicly shaming the "artist" in question here, as well as looking really bad. Whether or not it happens behind the scenes is not clear, but publicly it's not going to happen.

By not admitting anything, repeatedly, they admit it. Even if they came out and said otherwise, no one would believe it at this point, and no one should.

By not saying anything, it's telling users (not artists... artists create their own work) that if they can get a copyrighted image past them, they will print it, and telling us, the consumers, that they care more about the integrity of a collage creator than their own integrity. It's implying to us that they care more about their money than their integrity as well, and implying further that someone will profit, to the tune of $2 a shirt, plus up to $1000 in original prize money, if the royalty fees weren't taken out of that check. It's sheltering your son from a murder you know he committed... it doesn't change the facts, and it puts you at risk for abetting.

Once again, look at other sites... Threadless staff have posted blogs about individual shirts that were found to steal STYLISTICALLY or CONCEPTUALLY from other artists. This isn't style or concept. This is product being stolen. They talk of returned prizes, outlined a course of action ending in no reprints, and have even given Select prints to the artists in question. While woot wouldn't give a broccoli photographer a print to make up for it, they could certainly make it clear that there are consequences past "paying for a commercial license." I know woot isn't Threadless, but that's not about art, it's about taking responsibility and admitting you are wrong and doing something about it so your community knows that you not only say it's serious, but you take action that belies how serious you claim to take it. It takes a lot of orbs to admit you're wrong... one can easily contemplate what the converse would be. I think this thread has proven that there are many wooters who are going to be suspect from now on, and it's sad that woot once again doesn't get why there's a problem, or else understands it and has resorted to the old "if I ignore it, it isn't true" playbook. I'm just sayin'.

wow, it actually sold out?
i thought woot pulled the plug.
so are they sharing the profits with that pbase user?

sad part about this is the shirt didnt even print well.
the font is even harder to read on the actual shirt than it looks in the pic.

oh well.

im sure no one will forget this controversial veggie anytime soon.

route42nj wrote:sad part about this is the shirt didnt even print well.
the font is even harder to read on the actual shirt than it looks in the pic.

oh well.

im sure no one will forget this controversial veggie anytime soon.

Agreed. I had mine overnighted because it is a gift for a friend and I needed it quickly. But the font and the shirt are practically the same color, so the end result is essentially just a quasi-visible broccoli head. Very disappointing, especially given the extra money for shipping.

ataustin wrote:Agreed. I had mine overnighted because it is a gift for a friend and I needed it quickly. But the font and the shirt are practically the same color, so the end result is essentially just a quasi-visible broccoli head. Very disappointing, especially given the extra money for shipping.

Wow. Horrible concept possibly stolen from an earlier woot, little to no art, stolen google image (number one no less) with copyright, silence as to when that copyright was bought, and it didn't even print well?

Ladies and Gentlemen, the new worst woot ever.

AdderXYU wrote:Wow. Horrible concept possibly stolen from an earlier woot, little to no art, stolen google image (number one no less) with copyright, silence as to when that copyright was bought, and it didn't even print well?

Ladies and Gentlemen, the new worst woot ever.

Pictures!! Pictures!! Pictures!!!! Because no wooter will stop buying this thing unless there's visual proof that so many of us were right in the first place.

17th Greatest Woot shirt EVER!

JadenKale wrote:Pictures!! Pictures!! Pictures!!!! Because no wooter will stop buying this thing unless there's visual proof that so many of us were right in the first place.

im at work right now but ill try to take a pic and post it when i get home.

I think Joel's silence on when the rights were purchased after it had been asked NUMEROUS times speaks volumes, and it's a shame. I guess I'm just having a problem wrapping my head around the whole thing. I mean, if you're going to use [steal] copyrighted work, at least steal something good and do something good with it. This shirt does none of those things. Heck, I'm not even sure it was traced. I think the posterize filter does the same thing. After that, you have some text and a smiley face. At the point where you can say that the most original thing on a shirt, including the overall concept, is a freaking smiley face, you know there's a problem.

I bet someone is going to get in here and tell me to do better then. To that, I say that I have limited artistic ability, but I'll be damned if I can't trace and compose a better shirt than this designer did on this particular effort.

This isn't me being jealous or bitter. Why? Because if anyone read my post/rant, they would realize that I am a consumer of shirt.woot and not a producer [artist]. I have nothing to lose by this shirt getting a daily print other than it keeping another shirt out and probably knocking something off the reckoning list. Also, frankly, even if I was, there's not a lot to be jealous of in this situation.

But, hey, it sold, and I think that, besides the fact that it sounds like Woot bailed the designer out, it will probably even be reckoned. I guess we can now have a slew of dailies similar to this, because hey, why not, the masses apparently don't care. Heck, I'm surprised because even if the majority of people that bought this never wandered into the thread, the shirt itself just isn't good in any aspect of its execution.

I take some sick solace in the fact that the print itself will probably look terribad.

joelterrific wrote:Update on the current "worst woot ever" (thanks Adder): In addition to the earlier furor, the printing error route42nj pointed out has also come to light. Uggg... The text color is far too close to the shirt color. You'd think we'd have caught that.

We've intercepted the majority of the shipments and will be reprinting immediately for shipment Saturday. Overnighters should already have this abomination, but please know that orders will be reprinted and reshipped, (overnight, of course) arriving no later than Monday. Needless to say, anyone purchasing overnight shipping is entitled to a refund of the $5. We'll be sending an email tomorrow to this same effect, but feel free to let service@woot.com know and they'll issue the credit.

That's good business, Woot! Thanks!

joelterrific wrote:Update on the current "worst woot ever" (thanks Adder): In addition to the earlier furor, the printing error route42nj pointed out has also come to light. Uggg... The text color is far too close to the shirt color. You'd think we'd have caught that.

We've intercepted the majority of the shipments and will be reprinting immediately for shipment Saturday. Overnighters should already have this abomination, but please know that orders will be reprinted and reshipped, (overnight, of course) arriving no later than Monday. Needless to say, anyone purchasing overnight shipping is entitled to a refund of the $5. We'll be sending an email tomorrow to this same effect, but feel free to let service@woot.com know and they'll issue the credit.

All you Smartposters out there, your shirts will also ship on Saturday. Sorry we ruined everyone's Christmas.

so another helping of broccoli is on the way?

edit: im probably one of the only ones who liked this shirt in the first place. not something i probably want to admit amongst the current situation, but to each their own

route42nj wrote:so another helping of broccoli is on the way?

edit: im probably one of the only ones who liked this shirt in the first place. not something i probably want to admit amongst the current situation, but to each their own

Given that the design sold out on its first day and has already gone on to sell over 200 more in the last day, you are not the only one. However, the majority of active users (meaning people who comment regularly and participate in the derby) have been, at the least, perplexed by the situation thus far.

eHalcyon wrote:Given that the design sold out on its first day and has already gone on to sell over 200 more in the last day, you are not the only one. However, the majority of active users (meaning people who comment regularly and participate in the derby) have been, at the least, perplexed by the situation thus far.

I think the copyright controversy was just the straw that broke the camel's back on this one.

HeartlineTwist wrote:I think the copyright controversy was just the straw that broke the camel's back on this one.

And for those playing along, is still not resolved.

AdderXYU wrote:And for those playing along, is still not resolved.

I hope all the bad things in life happen to you, Adder.

i think its cool i am gonna get two broccoli shirts out of this debacle. i can give one to my roomie who loves broccoli.

JustJiggles wrote:I hope all the bad things in life happen to you, Adder.

That's really uncalled for, don't you think? We want to know who paid for the rights and when it was discovered the picture needed to be purchased. He's merely pointing that out. It means a great deal to those of us who actually abide by the rules. The snarkiness is really quite unflattering.

JustJiggles wrote:I hope all the bad things in life happen to you, Adder.

What a great story that would make! It'd be like a million little pieces, but without me lying.

Which, given how well this shirt sold, and how well a million little pieces sold, maybe that wouldn't be a very lucrative book.