Leahbh wrote:Funny, but won't this be rejected? or is this a joke entry?
Rejected? On what grounds may I ask?
This would be like the Mona Lisa smiling or something like that. This is very clearly a parody of SEVERAL DIFFERENT sources combined together to make a new and unique creation with all originally created artwork.
The fact that I have to draw from a reference is common sense. It would be impossible to draw a familiar character without one. BUT, anticipating this, I only used it as a VERY LOOSE guide and just for part of face. As Poe was not available to sit for me and it has been a while since I had seen him last for me to draw him from memory.
Also, there are no copyrights on history. If I was using a trademark BRAND or BRANDNAME then you would have grounds for Copyright based rejection, but history is fair game.
Bottomline is, everything in this piece is original artwork.
Copyright or plagiarism issues would be if I had traced it or somerhing - which I DEFINITELY did not do.
The only real argument would be -and I'm going by the ... THE UNOFFICIAL RULES POSTING ...in the section about plagiarism in an entry. You might say since the T-Shirt Poe is wearing is a Notable woot shirt, then it is similar to another shirt.
My Primary Defense...
However, as popular as woot has grown, I'm sure that if I were to show the shirt to my mother, father, or anyone in my family for that matter, they would think it's hilarious and a nice design...
***
...WITHOUT ANY KNOWLEDGE AT ALL OF PREVIOUS WOOT ENTRIES.
(Ironic as it may be since I did carry on about it to them when I used to make more designs, but anyway...I digress.)
In my opinion, this is key really, since it obviously works without PREVIOUS WOOT KNOWLEDGE, and serves as an extra bonus to those who do get the "inside joke" as it were.
***
I can cite multiple examples of woot PRINTED shirts that use FAR MORE QUESTIONABLE subject matter, with respect to Copyright, Trademark, and Plagiarism, than I have, also reminding all of us that just because it contains a recognizable character, figure, or "design element" found elsewhere, DOES NOT disqualify it.
In my defense, please allow me to cite a few examples of a few CLEARLY obvious parody designs that Woot HAS PRINTED:
1. The Back to the Future car...
(Copyright & Trademark)
2. The C3PO vs.Tinman
(Copyright & Trademark)
3. My Little Ponies (Copyright)
4.Nintendo Duck Hunt Zapper (Copyright)
5. I "heart" donunts
(clearly breaks the No "I heart things" rule)
6. Wicked Witch of OZ with gang signs
***(This one is a GREAT example BTW as it is a similar concept in the way of parody)
7. We can do it Rosie the gamer
8. The Flash (Marvel Comics Copyright &Trademark)
9. KittyTron
10. FishGuy from Starwars
11. Mario Heiroglyphics
12. Cookie Monster Binge
13. Terminator
14. Robocop
15. Abe Lincoln
16. Bob Pops (the popsicles...)
17. Sorry Pieces
18. George Washington w/ Mohawk
19. Both Nevermores
...and the list goes on, so to summarize, I would say that I believe that by looking at the aforementioned body of previously printed WOOT shirts as a well established legal precedent by which we can CALIBRATE or GAUGE our parody/plagiarism scale well enough to reveal beyond a reasonable doubt that my design is...
CLEARLY and TOTALLY within the boundaries of parody.
I rest my case, and hope that I leave my fellow wooters, as well as, Joel and the staff feeling confident about their vote.
Thank you for your consideration!
