Re: Harmless

saved

ramyb wrote:saved

Sweet, Ramybs back.

Welcome back bud. Those of us that love great shirts missed you.

Is that bunny sick or something?

Re: Harmless

Nice colors and looks very wearable!

This is very close to fablefire's meat eating bunny Woot shirts though? :-(

Shocker of all shocks, ramy made bunnies for the cutesy competition! Nothing personal sir, but you have to know you are gonna get these posts.

At least its morbid, I appreciate that much from ya.

Re: Harmless

Excellent!

Re: Harmless

I like, but this would be stronger without the second line of text-- just "come closer" is fine.

Re: Harmless

Have you ever played the game, "Killer Bunnies"? You should.

Re: Harmless

Wasn't there a couple of other meat-eating bunny shirt designs in past derbies (not sure if they printed)? Same designer?

krouth wrote:Wasn't there a couple of other meat-eating bunny shirt designs in past derbies (not sure if they printed)? Same designer?

Hahahahahahaha, you've got to be the sneakiest troll in the whole world.

Re: Harmless

Completely unoriginal. And Fable submitted another design that followed the exact same lines of her first, which makes this shirt completely unoriginal x2. Or is it three, since Fable's second shirt was also unoriginal after her first? Either way, DERBY WINNER!

kylemittskus wrote: Completely unoriginal. And Fable submitted another design that followed the exact same lines of her first, which makes this shirt completely unoriginal x2. Or is it three, since Fable's second shirt was also unoriginal after her first? Either way, DERBY WINNER!

Similar shirt exists.

thurdl01 wrote:Similar shirt exists.

similar posts exists...haha sorry i couldnt resist.

Jae87 wrote:Have you ever played the game, "Killer Bunnies"? You should.

I love that game!

Re: Harmless

Am I alone is recognizing this as a Monty Python reference instead of an unoriginal copy of another shirt? ...pretty sure python was creating killer bunnies long before woot existed...

Re: Harmless

I don't understand the tracking you did with the "Come Closer" type, or the choice of typeface for that matter. I think the hand-rendered type under it works much better with the illustration.

What was your reasoning behind the choices you made for the copy?

I'm not being sarcastic. The obsessive typographer in me is seriously curious.

scionofjubal wrote:Am I alone is recognizing this as a Monty Python reference instead of an unoriginal copy of another shirt? ...pretty sure python was creating killer bunnies long before woot existed...

Even then, doing a Monty Python killer rabbit shirt would be no more original. They're on Zazzle, available through Amazon, and several exist on cafe press.

ramyb wrote:saved

YAY another design by RAMYB and its awesome. voted! Hope it makes it

bellarific wrote:I don't understand the tracking you did with the "Come Closer" type, or the choice of typeface for that matter. I think the hand-rendered type under it works much better with the illustration.

What was your reasoning behind the choices you made for the copy?

I'm not being sarcastic. The obsessive typographer in me is seriously curious.

I originally hand-rendered all the words on the design, but it didn't exactly have the feel I wanted with the design. I wanted it to be very clear and crisp from far away, where you'd see the innocent bunny and the white font, then approach and see the rest of the design, the slight bit of blood on the paws, etc.- My goal was the make the hand-lettered second line match the first, while tying the crisp first line into the design better. I also did the red outline on the white letters by hand so that the feel of the letters would match that of the lineart on the design. Hope that makes some amount of sense.

Also, thanks to everyone who likes the design :D

ramyb wrote:I originally hand-rendered all the words on the design, but it didn't exactly have the feel I wanted with the design. I wanted it to be very clear and crisp from far away, where you'd see the innocent bunny and the white font, then approach and see the rest of the design, the slight bit of blood on the paws, etc.- My goal was the make the hand-lettered second line match the first, while tying the crisp first line into the design better. I also did the red outline on the white letters by hand so that the feel of the letters would match that of the lineart on the design. Hope that makes some amount of sense.

Also, thanks to everyone who likes the design :D

Why don't you address the fact that it is so similar to Fable's shirts and others already printed?

snarkygal wrote:Why don't you address the fact that it is so similar to Fable's shirts and others already printed?

its already been discussed before that lots of people have similar ideas. i have seen tons of food with faces before almost identical to the ones here, how bout we address the fact that you seem blind to those but not to this?

megsck wrote:its already been discussed before that lots of people have similar ideas. i have seen tons of food with faces before almost identical to the ones here, how bout we address the fact that you seem blind to those but not to this?

I agree with those saying this is too similar. Woot as a rule say that they don't like printing the same thing over and over, and this is clearly the same thing. You can pose the bunny in a different way, scatter the bones here instead of there, but you're basically remaking the same shirt with the same concept and very similar style. There's nothing really new here to warrant a pass on woot's own rules I would think. On the other hand, Ramy's other shirt this week is pretty clever and original. I'm hoping that it would get a print over this one.

tgentry wrote:I agree with those saying this is too similar. Woot as a rule say that they don't like printing the same thing over and over, and this is clearly the same thing. You can pose the bunny in a different way, scatter the bones here instead of there, but you're basically remaking the same shirt with the same concept and very similar style. There's nothing really new here to warrant a pass on woot's own rules I would think. On the other hand, Ramy's other shirt this week is pretty clever and original. I'm hoping that it would get a print over this one.

then let woot reject them. no need to demand explanation and harass the artist is my point.

Seriously Woot. This has been printed before. There's nothing original about a bunny next to bloody bones. Has been done many times, even for you guys.

Re: Harmless

Y halo thar plagiarism!



But wait! There's more!

Re: Harmless

Another killer bunny t-shirt?

C'mon, man.

Re: Harmless

In case it wasn't clear, the intention was for the bunny to be standing in front of a mongoose human skull. The point of the design was for you to see an innocent bunny, but then you find out it is a killer bunny when you come close, which is too late. I thought it was extremely obvious what the concept was without needing to explain it, and I thought the implicit reference was pretty obvious too. I think it's a pretty different take on the generic monty python run away shirts, and I also don't see why this would be considered too similar to a shirt with a cannibal bunny and its scared friends. If woot sees things differently, that's fine, but I am not going to waste the rest of my week defending my entry because I really think it's unnecessary. If you are sick of seeing bunnies, I have another entry this week that might interest you more

Re: Harmless

All of their mongoose stuff is pretty much the same to every other design they have ever done. Woot never rejects it and they certainly aren't going to start now, especially in a derby they specifically came up with for shiny cute, lol

At least for once they are on theme, what *really* drives me insane is how mongoose crap gets wedged into any theme with super fakon explanations trying to justify it. Well actually they can submit whatever they want, I don't care.. what REALLY chaps my ass is when it wins constantly pushing out much better tee shirts.

Re: Harmless

don't care if it is on theme, it still sucks

megsck wrote:then let woot reject them. no need to demand explanation and harass the artist is my point.

Yes. How stupid of us to ask a shirt's creator about plagiarism. There is a reason that this community exists and it is not so everyone can say, "Omelets made great I NEEDZ IT!"

Re: Harmless

I always enjoy the Ramyb haters.

kylemittskus wrote:Yes. How stupid of us to ask a shirt's creator about plagiarism. There is a reason that this community exists and it is not so everyone can say, "Omelets made great I NEEDZ IT!"

it was not plagiarism, and calling an artist that is a serious offense, so maybe you should make sure what plagiarism is before you go throwing around that word. they had the same idea as other people, but they drew it differently, that is not plagiarism. grow up.

megsck wrote:it was not plagiarism, and calling an artist that is a serious offense, so maybe you should make sure what plagiarism is before you go throwing around that word. they had the same idea as other people, but they drew it differently, that is not plagiarism. grow up.

Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.

I'd say that fits the bill perfectly for either "You've got to try this guys" or Monty Python depending on whether or not you think the rabbit ate the flesh off the bones behind it no matter how much the classless denizens of woot want to pretend Intellectual Property doesn't exist.

The idea of an cute yet deadly bunny killing people already exists in Monty Python. There is absolutely nothing added to that idea here. No parody, no originality, nothing. It is the exact same idea. That alone is rejectable.

As an added bonus there are already shirts exactly like this one which is also rejectable. We all know that woot likes to ignore the rules for ramy but pretending this is above board is just naive.

mrwednesday wrote:
As an added bonus there are already shirts exactly like this one which is also rejectable. We all know that woot likes to ignore the rules for ramy but pretending this is above board is just naive.

*cue the mindless ramy hoards screaming, "this is the only good shirt ever designed I have to have it ramy is best designer ever and he created everything so all ideas belong to him!"

First off Mr.Wed... I must respect a fellow who has three ferrets in their profile pic. Ferrets are friggin awesome, and I wish they weren't illegal in my state. That being said, I hope i can continue the following in a civilized manner and not appear to be offensive in anyway.

I believe Megsck is trying to defend the artist because her nature doesn't let her not take bullying personally, and a lot of the comments can be considered a bit aggressive. That's nothing new though, and it seems that there is a lot of personal history between many members of woot and the artist in question. I haven't been here long at all, but I've had a taste of the kind of ... show... that goes on here. It's all well and good, anonymity allows people to get away with saying what they need to say without having to worry about offending anyone.

It seems to me that a lot of the aggression is coming from RamyBs popularity. It's like he's the Yankees of shirt.woot (I'm not a sports guy so I'm not entirely certain that analogy makes any sense). I'm not a big fan of the fact that the guy has 2 shirts currently in the fog, but that's not really up to me. Calling forth for rejection is certainly a viable tactic for freeing up space for other artists here who could have a chance against the contenders in the fog, but at times these tactics seem dirty.

Yeah, I'll agree that this particular shirt is not original, but I don't completely agree that it's plagiarism. wait I take that back... it's not Copyright Infringement... I think the way plagiarism is being used in this sense is trying to make the situation seem as serious as Copyright infringement, when it's not entirely. Plagiarism gives us things like The Illusionist and The Prestige, No Doubt and Save Ferris, and GoBots and Transformers. These are all take similar ideas that to the rest of us seem redundant. Yes, the juxtaposition of a cute, seemingly innocent bunny to the remains of the once living is completely unoriginal as stated by many above, but he hasn't committed Infringement.

Do I think this shirt should get rejected? Truthfully, yes. I don't think Woot can deny that similar shirts exist. Do I think the artist needs to feel bad about it? No. I don't think it's a terrible design, but I can see that it's similar enough to warrant the "Similar Shirts Exist" achievement. His atom shirt is pretty original, and that already has a good shot. Ok, I realize I've completely talked myself into accepting this shirt as plagiarism... but hey, that's like how C.S. Lewis suddenly found God when he wrote the Narnia series to refute a case for God. Stupid tangent.

Oh RamyB... nothing personal. I myself enjoy some of your stuff. I'm just trying to view this thread from different angles. It's plagiarism in that you're using a similar idea that MANY people are guilty of using, but you aren't the first and you certainly won't be the last. I mean, c'mon... we're all on a site that lets people put art on shirts to print and sell. that's not a completely original idea either. I think people pick on you because you're always winning. Good for you, too bad for the rest of us, but I don't think you should be put on trial the way some these members seem to want you to be. hmmm. Now I feel awkward.

mrwednesday wrote:Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.

You do realize that definition can also be applied to many historical classical composers, artists, writers, poets, etc. don't you? Everything has been done before. I'm not saying this design is all that original, just pointing out the flaw in your plagarism argument. Just sayin, k thx

I'm new to woot and usually like to lurk more than chime in, but I thought I should add my 2 cents as I plan to buy all my new shirts from here now that I found this place! I think the design is super duper cute and am hoping it doesn't get rejected b/c I would really want to buy it. Sure the idea has been done before but honestly none of the links I saw had anything that looked this polished and.....just cute (short of the reckoned one which I can't buy now). I love Monty Python and have been wanting a killer bunny shirt for a while now but the ones Ive seen in the past all look "off". So what if the idea itself has been seen before, I think it's a well done implementation of a classic and seriously if I had a ton of time I can probably find an "original" idea that most of the other derby entries "plagiarized" from. I don't think people should be punished for improving something good which is what I see this as, it's how we get better cars food everything...people take an old idea and enhance and improve it, else we'd all be driving what? Ford modelTs with 20gal/mi ^_^

mrwednesday wrote:Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.

I'd say that fits the bill perfectly for either "You've got to try this guys" or Monty Python depending on whether or not you think the rabbit ate the flesh off the bones behind it no matter how much the classless denizens of woot want to pretend Intellectual Property doesn't exist.

The idea of an cute yet deadly bunny killing people already exists in Monty Python. There is absolutely nothing added to that idea here. No parody, no originality, nothing. It is the exact same idea. That alone is rejectable.

As an added bonus there are already shirts exactly like this one which is also rejectable. We all know that woot likes to ignore the rules for ramy but pretending this is above board is just naive.

this is not plagirism. taking someones elses artwork and selling it as your own, now that is plagirism. this is, at its worse, stealing an idea, and probably is really just a similar idea that they all shared. you can hate them for their unoriginality but this artist is not a plagirist and its just out right disrespectful to say so just because you hate his design. so why dont we just leave them alone, its already been brought up in this thread, there is no need to keep bringing it up. just drop it and let woot do what they will.

Re: Harmless

For some reason, and I could be wrong, but I think this is not the first time Ramyb has put up an entry that has been compared to Fable's "You Have To Try This Guys" win from Derby #82.

snarkygal wrote:For some reason, and I could be wrong, but I think this is not the first time Ramyb has put up an entry that has been compared to Fable's "You Have To Try This Guys" win from Derby #82.

Perhaps you are remembering that "you have to try this guys" was compared to my entries when it was posted.

Re: Harmless

i love bunnies!!! got two of my own. i'm a sucker for cute soft furry animals.

Re: Harmless

i love bunnies!!! got two of my own. i'm a sucker for cute soft furry animals.

Re: Harmless

I always admire how well you work with a limited color palette. I really like the bunny's form, which probably seems silly to say, since it's just a 'ittle bunneh, but still. I just like how he looks.

I can take or leave the text. I am not a huge fan of texty shirts, but it doesn't bother me particularly bad here. I would be pleased to wear this bunneehh of deaths!

Re: Harmless

I'll address the major concerns in bulk.

1. This isn't plagiarism because tons of people have done it before.

Shoot someone. Rob a store. I think you'll find that the law doesn't really care if someone else did it first and didn't get punished.

2. Nothing is new so every idea is unoriginal so it's not plagiarism

Write a book about a child wizard going to a wizarding school. Make a movie about a teenager thrust into a rebellion to stop an evil mystical empire. See if you get contacted by any lawyers.

Most everything is a twist on major themes. As mentioned, a picture of an atom is just that. There are lots of pictures of what people conceive of atoms to look like. However there are certain combinations of elements that are unique to the creators who popularized them.

Cute killer bunnies begin and end with Monty Python. No one put those particular things together in that particular way (cute bunny curiously surrounded by piles of bones) before they did. The same way you can't start writing books or making shirts about little people with magic rings, you can't recreate someone else's specific ideas lawfully.

3. You just hate ramy because he's popular and are jealous

Find me another popular artist here that I hate. I love tgentry, cmdixon, drakxxx, kasey, rglee just to name a few. I'll give you a hint. They are fabulous designers with integrity and creativity who make original works most of the time and when they make derivative works they make very certain to put their own stamp on it.

ramy gets so much hate because he repeatedly rips off other people without making use of any parody whatsoever. You can like it or not but classic ideas and subject matter are public domain, and Monty Python and the Holy Grail isn't. Their Intellectual Property rights still stand. So to make any derivative work you absolutely have to have adequate parody and there is none here. The rabbit is presented in exactly the same way as the movie with no differences whatsoever. This is just unlicensed merchandise and as with anything else, cashing in on someone else's ideas is plagiarism. It doesn't matter if you think it's better plagiarism than other things you've seen.

The fact is ramy has already done it before. He made a design for the propaganda derby where he shamelessly ripped off Stephen Colbert and his crusade against bears straight down to the "godless killing machines" tag line with absolutely no changes whatsoever.

He has blatantly plagiarized before and will do so again. The bears shirt he pulled himself before it could get rejected because he knew he'd been caught.

He tried to pretend initially the shirt wasn't about bears at all just a generic "thing to be wary of" then changed his tact saying of course he took it from Colbert but it was a tribute and tried to say he googled godless killing machines and found no shirts like it despite the fact that at the time and still now the truthiness wiki and shirts with the tag are the first results.

In the year or so he's been here he's learned to play the victim because new users buy it, but the fact remains he's repeatedly been caught stealing other people's work and some of us are tired of it.

Re: Harmless

I really thought these two left for good, but upon hearing about the theme I knew I'd be wrong.
It's so funny that they both draw in the same exact way. really funny the PATP's looks similar too.

mrwednesday wrote:I'll address the major concerns in bulk.

1. This isn't plagiarism because tons of people have done it before.

Shoot someone. Rob a store. I think you'll find that the law doesn't really care if someone else did it first and didn't get punished.

2. Nothing is new so every idea is unoriginal so it's not plagiarism

Write a book about a child wizard going to a wizarding school. Make a movie about a teenager thrust into a rebellion to stop an evil mystical empire. See if you get contacted by any lawyers.

Most everything is a twist on major themes. As mentioned, a picture of an atom is just that. There are lots of pictures of what people conceive of atoms to look like. However there are certain combinations of elements that are unique to the creators who popularized them.

Cute killer bunnies begin and end with Monty Python. No one put those particular things together in that particular way (cute bunny curiously surrounded by piles of bones) before they did. The same way you can't start writing books or making shirts about little people with magic rings, you can't recreate someone else's specific ideas lawfully.

3. You just hate ramy because he's popular and are jealous

Find me another popular artist here that I hate. I love tgentry, cmdixon, drakxxx, kasey, rglee just to name a few. I'll give you a hint. They are fabulous designers with integrity and creativity who make original works most of the time and when they make derivative works they make very certain to put their own stamp on it.

ramy gets so much hate because he repeatedly rips off other people without making use of any parody whatsoever. You can like it or not but classic ideas and subject matter are public domain, and Monty Python and the Holy Grail isn't. Their Intellectual Property rights still stand. So to make any derivative work you absolutely have to have adequate parody and there is none here. The rabbit is presented in exactly the same way as the movie with no differences whatsoever. This is just unlicensed merchandise and as with anything else, cashing in on someone else's ideas is plagiarism. It doesn't matter if you think it's better plagiarism than other things you've seen.

The fact is ramy has already done it before. He made a design for the propaganda derby where he shamelessly ripped off Stephen Colbert and his crusade against bears straight down to the "godless killing machines" tag line with absolutely no changes whatsoever.

He has blatantly plagiarized before and will do so again. The bears shirt he pulled himself before it could get rejected because he knew he'd been caught.

He tried to pretend initially the shirt wasn't about bears at all just a generic "thing to be wary of" then changed his tact saying of course he took it from Colbert but it was a tribute and tried to say he googled godless killing machines and found no shirts like it despite the fact that at the time and still now the truthiness wiki and shirts with the tag are the first results.

In the year or so he's been here he's learned to play the victim because new users buy it, but the fact remains he's repeatedly been caught stealing other people's work and some of us are tired of it.

This shirt is not similar to the other shirts. It just shows a bunny with some skeleton. You're assuming that the bunny is cannibalistic. There's other plausible explanations for this shirt. For example, the bunny could be infected.

mrwednesday wrote:
Write a book about a child wizard going to a wizarding school. Make a movie about a teenager thrust into a rebellion to stop an evil mystical empire. See if you get contacted by any lawyers.

I am just going to address this, because you are so set in your Ramby hating ways that nothing anyone says is going to reduce your secret love for him.

In reply to this, all I have to say is that you must not read much fantasy. First off Rowlings was no where near the first to write about a child wizard going to wizarding school, and will not be the last. If I were to go write a book with that theme, I may get contacted by lawyers, but they would not have a leg to stand on unless I made it so similar that you couldn't really tell the difference. Just look at the fantasy series out there that basically tell the same story, with the same difficulties, by many different authors, and there is never a plagiarism problem. The only one that I know of the Rowlings went after and won against was Larry Trotter (or whatever it was), and that was because the guy wrote pretty much the same thing with name changes here and there.

How about this example: Boy discovers he has magical powers. He leaves his homelands because it is not safe. He meets a girl. He sets out to save the world from the lord of evil. He gets captured by a group of female spell users, who enslave him for the good of humanity. He gets away. ect.

What series is that?
Some people would say Jordan's Wheel of Time, and some would say Goodkind's Sword of Truth.

mrwednesday wrote:I'll address the major concerns in bulk.

1. This isn't plagiarism because tons of people have done it before.

Shoot someone. Rob a store. I think you'll find that the law doesn't really care if someone else did it first and didn't get punished.

2. Nothing is new so every idea is unoriginal so it's not plagiarism

Write a book about a child wizard going to a wizarding school. Make a movie about a teenager thrust into a rebellion to stop an evil mystical empire. See if you get contacted by any lawyers.

Most everything is a twist on major themes. As mentioned, a picture of an atom is just that. There are lots of pictures of what people conceive of atoms to look like. However there are certain combinations of elements that are unique to the creators who popularized them.

Cute killer bunnies begin and end with Monty Python. No one put those particular things together in that particular way (cute bunny curiously surrounded by piles of bones) before they did. The same way you can't start writing books or making shirts about little people with magic rings, you can't recreate someone else's specific ideas lawfully.

3. You just hate ramy because he's popular and are jealous

Find me another popular artist here that I hate. I love tgentry, cmdixon, drakxxx, kasey, rglee just to name a few. I'll give you a hint. They are fabulous designers with integrity and creativity who make original works most of the time and when they make derivative works they make very certain to put their own stamp on it.

ramy gets so much hate because he repeatedly rips off other people without making use of any parody whatsoever. You can like it or not but classic ideas and subject matter are public domain, and Monty Python and the Holy Grail isn't. Their Intellectual Property rights still stand. So to make any derivative work you absolutely have to have adequate parody and there is none here. The rabbit is presented in exactly the same way as the movie with no differences whatsoever. This is just unlicensed merchandise and as with anything else, cashing in on someone else's ideas is plagiarism. It doesn't matter if you think it's better plagiarism than other things you've seen.

The fact is ramy has already done it before. He made a design for the propaganda derby where he shamelessly ripped off Stephen Colbert and his crusade against bears straight down to the "godless killing machines" tag line with absolutely no changes whatsoever.

He has blatantly plagiarized before and will do so again. The bears shirt he pulled himself before it could get rejected because he knew he'd been caught.

He tried to pretend initially the shirt wasn't about bears at all just a generic "thing to be wary of" then changed his tact saying of course he took it from Colbert but it was a tribute and tried to say he googled godless killing machines and found no shirts like it despite the fact that at the time and still now the truthiness wiki and shirts with the tag are the first results.

In the year or so he's been here he's learned to play the victim because new users buy it, but the fact remains he's repeatedly been caught stealing other people's work and some of us are tired of it.

i definatly agree with you. i dont get how no one else sees it

stupididiot wrote:this is not plagirism. taking someones elses artwork and selling it as your own, now that is plagirism. this is, at its worse, stealing an idea, and probably is really just a similar idea that they all shared.

... and he's trying to sell it which you just said is plagiarism.

@everyone: please stop making puerile comments about how we hate RamyB because he's popular. Like Wednesday said, there are PLENTY of artists that I get excited for when they print and they are popular too. There is no jealousy here and no secret love (whomever said that sounds like a 12 year old). It's that RamyB wins by stealing ideas! From this site alone, there have been two shirts that have the exact same idea and a very similar composition, both were Fable's. Your ad hominem attacks do nothing to counter our argument that this idea is stolen. If you disagree, then do so by showing us how it's not. Saying "I don't care because I want it," doesn't work either.

kylemittskus wrote:... and he's trying to sell it which you just said is plagiarism.

*sigh* they had the same idea, as long as they didnt take the previously done work from someone else and put it on a shirt and tried to sell it, its not plagiarism. I can take anyone of these ideas, do it in my own style or way whatever, and it would still be mine. granted it wouldnt be the first of its kind but it would just be another version of the same thing. that is not plagiarism. do you understand that now? im not stating an opinion. that is the facts. if one of the other shirts tried to file a lawsuit against this one for plagiarism, they would have no case. I have dealt with friends whos work has been plagiarized, so i know a lil bit about the situation when it comes to artwork. please all i ask is to stop throwing around wild accusations that are not true. you grasp onto a word because you think its dramatic. just call this idea unoriginal and MOVE ON.

I'd like this better without that second line of text.

stupididiot wrote:*sigh* they had the same idea, as long as they didnt take the previously done work from someone else and put it on a shirt and tried to sell it, its not plagiarism. I can take anyone of these ideas, do it in my own style or way whatever, and it would still be mine. granted it wouldnt be the first of its kind but it would just be another version of the same thing. that is not plagiarism. do you understand that now? im not stating an opinion. that is the facts. if one of the other shirts tried to file a lawsuit against this one for plagiarism, they would have no case. I have dealt with friends whos work has been plagiarized, so i know a lil bit about the situation when it comes to artwork. please all i ask is to stop throwing around wild accusations that are not true. you grasp onto a word because you think its dramatic. just call this idea unoriginal and MOVE ON.

And this is where you are wrong. Even if I take someone's idea and put it in my own words, it is plagiarism if I do not give credit to the person I got the idea from or have a specific artistic reason for doing so (like using a famous line from a Shakespearean play in a piece of literature). I grasp onto the word because I understand what it means. If I wanted to be dramatic, I would say, "This thieving criminal weaseled into the shirt world and highjacked another designer's idea with the help of the Illuminati." You have been here a couple months which means you didn't see the two previous shirts (one of them above) that have already been submitted (one printed). If you don't see this as plagiarism, i.e.: taking another person's idea and claiming it as your own without any artistic commentary for doing so, then you don't. But don't call me dramatic because you think it's dramatic to do so.

Re: Harmless

I don't usually post, but I wanted to defend ramyb.

I've been a fan of ramyb's work for sometime now. My fiancee and I buy every shirt they ramyb makes with a bunny on it that woot sells. We love bunnies, we have 3 of our own and I am excited to see a new bunny shirt. Frankly, I love this shirt design, and I get it.

If you've ever owned a rabbit, you know how tricky they can be. You know behind those cute little eyes that they are planning something. To me, ramyb captures that. I also think his bunnies are totally adorable and are very well drawn. I actually get very excited when I see ramyb's art in the derby.

I do already own the "You gotta try this shirt," but I want this one too. To me, they are different. If I like it, I am willing to buy it. I don't think ramyb takes the spot of a better shirt, I think if there were a better shirt, people would vote for it.

I dunno, just my two cents. As an artist and a bunny owner, I get what ramyb is accomplishing here.

kylemittskus wrote:And this is where you are wrong. Even if I take someone's idea and put it in my own words, it is plagiarism if I do not give credit to the person I got the idea from or have a specific artistic reason for doing so (like using a famous line from a Shakespearean play in a piece of literature). I grasp onto the word because I understand what it means. If I wanted to be dramatic, I would say, "This thieving criminal weaseled into the shirt world and highjacked another designer's idea with the help of the Illuminati." You have been here a couple months which means you didn't see the two previous shirts (one of them above) that have already been submitted (one printed). If you don't see this as plagiarism, i.e.: taking another person's idea and claiming it as your own without any artistic commentary for doing so, then you don't. But don't call me dramatic because you think it's dramatic to do so.

You should probably also change your name and spell things properly if you want your attempts at intellectual arguments taken seriously.

did thye use the exact same image from the other shirt and try to pass it off as their own? NO

did they use the exact same idea from the other shirt and try to pass it off as their own? NO, they have the same general concept, which is an homage to the movie im assuming, but his idea is a bit different.
this artist wanted to portray the bunny large in the foreground so that from far away all you see is this cute bunny with the words come closer, then when you get closer you notice the blood and skeleton and the smaller text. that is completely different than the other shirt which just has one bunny who has eaten meat and three other bunnies who are eating carrots.
so this is not plagiarism. he did not steal the image, nor even the exact idea. sure they are all the same general concept, but by no means is this plagiarism. you assume this artist intentially went and looked at the other shirt and thought., "i will steal this idea and make a profit from it! mwahahahahaahaha!" you also assume that just because my account here is only for a few months that i havnt been to this site before hand. i have seen the other shirt. you also assume because i like having a funny screen name and because i make spelling errors that i am unintelligent, you would be wrong again.
you do not have enough information to be accusing this artist of plagiarism. how do you know they didnt have this design done years ago and just decided to submit it now? did you ask in a polite manner? did you even maybe pm them in a respectful way to tell them that their shirt is like other shirts? no you rudely commented on their submission accusing them of plagiarising. this is what i have a problem with. you could have handled this with some class, but instead you were rude and disrespectful to the artist.

Re: Harmless

This shirts ok, but your other one in the derby is amazing!

And I fail to see how you plagiarized this... I guess it's just cool to hate.

Re: Harmless

This may almost make up for missing "You have to try this guys"

"But look at the BONES!"

That's the first thing I thought when I saw the shirt. This tells me that perhaps it lacks just a little in originality. The only compensation for lacking originality is subtlety, which I see none of here. I don't care who the artist is or what people say he's done. The colors work well, shading is great, don't care for the text though... all this aside, I just imagine john cleese seeing this and thinking his children will be getting royalties. Too bad he'll be wrong.

stupididiot wrote:did thye use the exact same image from the other shirt and try to pass it off as their own? NO

did they use the exact same idea from the other shirt and try to pass it off as their own? NO, they have the same general concept, which is an homage to the movie im assuming, but his idea is a bit different.
this artist wanted to portray the bunny large in the foreground so that from far away all you see is this cute bunny with the words come closer, then when you get closer you notice the blood and skeleton and the smaller text. that is completely different than the other shirt which just has one bunny who has eaten meat and three other bunnies who are eating carrots.
so this is not plagiarism. he did not steal the image, nor even the exact idea. sure they are all the same general concept, but by no means is this plagiarism. you assume this artist intentially went and looked at the other shirt and thought., "i will steal this idea and make a profit from it! mwahahahahaahaha!" you also assume that just because my account here is only for a few months that i havnt been to this site before hand. i have seen the other shirt. you also assume because i like having a funny screen name and because i make spelling errors that i am unintelligent, you would be wrong again.
you do not have enough information to be accusing this artist of plagiarism. how do you know they didnt have this design done years ago and just decided to submit it now? did you ask in a polite manner? did you even maybe pm them in a respectful way to tell them that their shirt is like other shirts? no you rudely commented on their submission accusing them of plagiarising. this is what i have a problem with. you could have handled this with some class, but instead you were rude and disrespectful to the artist.

I apologize. My comment was immature.

Plagiarism does not need to be intentional. And as I said before, plagiarism does not need to be "exactly" the same. However, I would answer your question: "did they use the exact same idea from the other shirt and try to pass it off as their own?" Absolutely.

I know plenty about plagiarism. As you asked me not to assume things about you, I would appreciate the same. As there is no set rule, say 75% = plagiarism, it is a judgment call. In my best judgment, this idea is blatantly stolen from at least one source. I count at least three. At the very least -- and I mean very least -- this is a completely unoriginal idea.

Your last point is a lucid one, so I will address it. You're correct. I do not know if this was designed five years ago. But neither do you. We are both making assumptions and really the same ones; we are just coming to different conclusions. You just don't like mine because they are exactly opposite of yours. You are giving him the benefit of the doubt for no reason whatsoever. I refuse to do so, although I think I have reason for my stance.

stupididiot wrote:snip

You heard it here folks. If you change the proportions it's no longer plagiarism. I completely forgot that the Monty Python bunny was small and that this one is large. What was I thinking?!?!?!?!

Given that you purchased one item on May 12th I'd say you realize the irony of your username and are just trolling. Kind of pathetic really. Use your real account like a big boy.

mrwednesday wrote:
Given that you purchased one item on May 12th I'd say you realize the irony of your username and are just trolling. Kind of pathetic really. Use your real account like a big boy.

i joined this site to submit designs, which ive done a couple of already. so why would this be an alt account? i have friends on here who know me. i dont understand why you see one shirt and assume its an alt? in fact i submitted pieces even before i bought a shirt here, its been that long since ive liked something. so maybe you should keep your assumptions to yourself, you know what they say about people who make assumptions.

Please keep the debate from getting personal so I don't have to start deleting. I get a little gung-ho if I have to start deleting.

Re: Harmless

Am I the only one who realizes that this argument is silly?
The argument you are looking for is whether TRIBUTES are legal, not plagiarism.

sillykitten wrote:Am I the only one who realizes that this argument is silly?
The argument you are looking for is whether TRIBUTES are legal, not plagiarism.

Tributes are legal with parody. This has no parody. Hence it is plagiarism. Simple as that.

stupididiot wrote:i joined this site to submit designs, which ive done a couple of already. so why would this be an alt account? i have friends on here who know me. i dont understand why you see one shirt and assume its an alt? in fact i submitted pieces even before i bought a shirt here, its been that long since ive liked something. so maybe you should keep your assumptions to yourself, you know what they say about people who make assumptions.

You might want to take your own advice. Let's take this at face value. You joined two months ago so you know literally nothing about the site before that. You assume you know this designer's motivations. You assume you know their history. You also assume that you know my history and motivations at this site. You also assume you know anything about IP which you clearly don't. A simple read through of any literature on IP, derivative works, parody, etc. contradicts nearly everything you've said on the matter. What I don't need to assume is that you're trolling because you are.

(Sorry, Thunder Things, I had meant to leave it at the previous comment since it's not worth arguing with those whose defense is "you hate the artist," but a feel at least a rebuttal is warranted and I have nothing further to say on that particular matter)

@mrwednesday et al.

As someone who knows something about patenting designs (fairly similar to media) this is definitely NOT BY ANY MEANS infringement. I'm not even sure why you people are arguing about the definition of "plagiarism" when it's not a legally-defined term. You don't sue someone for plagiarism, you sue them for infringement of your rights as a copyright etc. holder.

Plagiarism is a broad term used generally by academia, since such institutions are designed for the creation and dissemination of ideas. As such, plagiarism is defined by each institution along with a set of consequences for violating their rules on the subject. Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with the corporate world and the concept of infringement, where one party has to have some form of legal backing confirming them as the copyright etc. holder. Hence, any arguments about this shirt plagiarizing are utterly pointless and have no consequence whatsoever.

tl;dr:
Woot is not an institution that defines or recognizes plagiarism outside of what gets rejected. This design has not been rejected, therefore it DOES NOT PLAGIARIZE.

DarkDrag0n wrote:As such, plagiarism is defined by each institution along with a set of consequences for violating their rules on the subject.

It maybe doesn't plagiarize yet, but based on woots past rulings this is plagiarism and will get rejected. It also infringes on rights so there's really no way to win.

Also on a more technical note, plagiarism is defined by the institution and committing the act depends on that definition not whether or not you get caught. If you copy and paste a term paper together it's plagiarized whether or not the teacher catches you.

Re: Harmless

Ramyb, I have to say in all honesty - you do have a great facility with shadow and with providing depth behind your central figure. But after looking at your subs beside Seki's - those are better executed. Your characters are pretty amorphous - blobby. Not a total fail by cheebee standards, certainly. But Seki's characters are a bit crisper and, for me, more engaging.
Still diabetic, though, so I couldn't stomach that much cute. I wish you both luck, tho - this derby was made for you (and the agida of a certain commentor).

ChefRAZ wrote:I really thought these two left for good, but upon hearing about the theme I knew I'd be wrong.
It's so funny that they both draw in the same exact way. really funny the PATP's looks similar too.

If you check out "u can't haz this v2 " you'll see that they also speak together.

Seki uses we: It was suggested that we resub with a new thumbnail since it wasn't showing enough of the design, so we made some minor tweaks and put it back up and Ramyb explains that her original design will be withdrawn.

zekecatz wrote:If you check out "u can't haz this v2 " you'll see that they also speak together.

Seki uses we: It was suggested that we resub with a new thumbnail since it wasn't showing enough of the design, so we made some minor tweaks and put it back up and Ramyb explains that her original design will be withdrawn.

We "speak together" specifically on that entry, because it's a collab. We both worked on it, and made decisions about it together.

ramyb wrote:We "speak together" specifically on that entry, because it's a collab. We both worked on it, and made decisions about it together.

Me ,myself, and I. Also speak together about this thing or another.

I think this can be settled very easily. If this shirt was placed in a line-up with fifteen other generic Monty Python killer rabbit shirts, would this stand out? Is this at all unique? What separates this design from any other shirt involving killer rabbits? The answer is quite obviously nothing. There is no new take on the idea; this is a straight copy of an overused idea. To me, this has to be rejected.

I won't use the word plagiarism because that has come under fire (though I'd argue that this is), but this clearly falls under the category of "Similar Shirts Exist". A few thumbnails were posted earlier and they are all very, very similar. I won't alienate the users who defend this design and say that Ramy is nothing but a thief and this design is pure plagiarism; rather, I'll make the less harsh argument that this idea has been done before. Will this get rejected? Probably not. This will print Friday and stay on the top of the Reckoning for awhile.

I'd like someone to tell me, though, how this design is at all unique compared to other killer rabbit shirts. It's ok if you love this shirt; I'm not going to force others to dislike Ramy. But tell me why this doesn't fit into the rejection category of "Similar Shirts Exist". And saying "The rabbit is bigger, thus this is original!" or "The text doesn't specifically say 'Killer Rabbit!' or 'Look at the bones!' or 'Monty Python'" or "You see, I love rabbits and I love this shirt" doesn't cut it.

i liek tortles

Spiritgreen wrote:Nice colors and looks very wearable!

This is very close to fablefire's meat eating bunny Woot shirts though? :-(

It's not like meat eating/dangerous bunny is new.

long time buyer, first time poster.

I also have pet rabbits and have bought quite a few of the bunny themed shirts. And lunamadison is very correct that those cute little eyes are planning something.

I frequently joke with my sister that some of my rabbits would kill me in my sleep if they had the thumbs required to hold a knife. Rabbits, they can be shifty.

This shirt is not the same in theme as "you gotta try this". And ever since Killer Grail, killer bunnies is a pop culture joke. Get over it.

I have bought a bunch of Ramyb shirts, and I've bought a bunch from other artists as well. I for one, am happy that he's back.

If you don't like it, don't vote for it. Let Woot reject it.

This is one of those times, Ramy, that I think the design could've benefited from a little realism. If the skull were defined and actually looked human (rather than round/cartoonish) I think the bunny's cuteness would have more impact.

But my biggest beef with the design is that it looks like I could go into Hot Topic and find this on the shelf. It's morbid, 'cute', with a predictable 'scary' phrase and odd lettering(too clean/different from the design). :\

ThunderThighs wrote:Please keep the debate from getting personal so I don't have to start deleting. I get a little gung-ho if I have to start deleting.

Hahaah, sounds like a variation of the Hulk.
You wouldn't like me when I start deleting..

Lot of ramyb hate here...but you haters must be right...no one should ever be allowed to say or use killer bunnies ever again. I mean that's plagiarism right? Honestly, I looked at all the designs that were touted as being the source of plagiarism for this shirt and ramy's is the same idea, namely a killer bunny. But this design is quite different in it's purpose and overall quality. I think it's an improvement on those designs. Isn't that what society is built upon anyway? Every facet of our world is an improvement on something that was designed or invented previously (which was an improvement on earlier work). Hate it or love it, ramy is obviously a crowd pleasing designer.

I guess you're only allowed to plagiarize if you make the highest grossing movie of all time...I still think Pocahontas is better

animizegirl wrote:i love bunnies!!! got two of my own. i'm a sucker for cute soft furry animals.

They're quite tasty stewed.

Re: Harmless

I was looking through the reckoning and ramyb has made around

35,000(gross)since January JUST FROM SELLING SHIRTS HERE. That's around a quarter of a million dollars (gross) for woot. It's just too hard to argue with the lowest common denominator.

Honestly though there should be some kind of clause where once you've made so much money (or have won so many derbys, since some single shirts make a lot of money but don't take up lots of derby wins) you just start making dedicated shirts and give other people a chance in the derby.

marzipanapple wrote:

But my biggest beef with the design is that it looks like I could go into Hot Topic and find this on the shelf. It's morbid, 'cute', with a predictable 'scary' phrase and odd lettering(too clean/different from the design). :\

I think that, more than anything else, is what I find so off-putting about this design. That cornball phrase is like so many others you see on the black-shirt wearing neckbeards who frequent Hot Topic. Kind of like the:

"You laugh at me because I'm different
I laugh at you because you're all the same."

Woo. Edgy.

And I say this as someone who, once upon a time, shopped at Hot Topic to be edgy. And as someone who counts a few neckbeards among her friends. This is part of their lockstep uniform, along with dragons and other edgy phrases indicating how "scary" they are.

And then they go home and play D&D.

Re: Harmless

Ramy you take a lot of flak for your designs so I'm sure you've developed a thick skin, but it must be a little bit satisfying to see other people flat out trying to copy your style this week and finding it's -not- so easy to do.

You definitely have skills, this is drawn and shaded very well. Some people take offense at the lack of expressiveness in this kind of character, and what to them may be the incomprehensible mass appeal of the style - but there's no denying you make a lot of people want to buy a lot of shirts, and that doesn't happen out of laziness or lack of talent.

BTW, the more I look at this the less it seems similar to fablefire's meat eatin' bunny Woot shirt, so I'm sorry I brought that up. This has more of a Hannibunny Lecter vibe to it. ^_^

Good luck to ya.

This is, in my opinion, one of the best plays of the Monty Python style that i have seen. So what is to different people have a similar drawing style. It would be like saying Best Buy plagiarized Radioshacks business model. get over it guys.. if you dont like it dont vote for it nor buy it. Simple as that.

Good Job Ramyb I do like this shirt.

Re: Harmless

The shirt's OK, the comment thread is excellent. A fine mix of fans, haters, bystanders, holier-than-thous, less-holy-than-thous, rules lawyers, the definition-obsessed, rabbit owners, rabbit eaters, rabbit-shirt wearers, and me. I congratulate the artist not just for the artwork, but for being able to generate such a response.

As for my personal opinion on the well-rendered shirt, I'll just say "Don't blame me, I voted for Carbon Atom".

[quote postid="" user="colinm09"]I think this can be settled very easily. If this shirt was placed in a line-up with fifteen other generic Monty Python killer rabbit shirts, would this stand out? Is this at all unique? What separates this design from any other shirt involving killer rabbits? The answer is quite obviously nothing. There is no new take on the idea; this is a straight copy of an overused idea. To me, this has to be rejected.

I LOVE this shirt. It would stand out from all the other "kiler bunny type" shirts because it is not all bloody and gross. It gets it's point across while still being "cute" isn't that what Kawaii iis about? I'm so hoping it prints, I'm in for 2!

juliaL719 wrote:
And then they go home and play D&D.

Hey now! D&D can be good, wholesome, nerdy fun. ;)


And Ramy, I sent you a PM on what we talked about a few months ago. I think I might go start a thread now actually..

Re: Harmless

Just seems too predictable. I think I agree it would have been more powerful without the text.

Re: Harmless

http://www.threadless.com/submission/282041/looks_can_be_deceiving

Kassiandora wrote:Just seems too predictable. I think I agree it would have been more powerful without the text.

This is the thing.

This is not remotely unique. Fable's wasn't unique, and this is the same style, same basic concept. OOH KILLER RABBIT.

I think people are getting hung up on Monty Python when really, anyone who has ever woken up and said "damn, it's nice to have eyes" has seen this shirt before. Think back to that nice facepainted juggalo girl who pouted as she gave you thirty cents back at the local qwikmart (and maybe beamed when you bought a faygo). She was wearing this same shirt. Remember when you stumbled into hot topic because you thought it was the entrance to forever21 by mistake? This shirt was on the walls. Remember last year when you went to shirt.woot? Yep, this was definitely for sale. It's a poorly conceived slogan shirt for the alienated post-goth overpriviledged glittervamp fan. It's happy bunny with bones. It's Emily the Strange with ears. It's fablefire with a human skull instead of what is presumably a bunny's (though when you get this deformed in your "art" really where does the line stop?)... It's all just one more "I don't fit in, look at my shirt, it's so creepy and cute JUST LIKE ME please call me Bella Namaste because Susan just doesn't speak to my dark miasma of a soul."

But it's also poorly executed. Look at that text. Defend that text. I dare you to do so and look educated. It's uncreatively executed. There are hundreds of entries here that are on theme and don't use this same exact formula going on in every single win from these two. As for the concept itself? Sure, you can trace it back to Monty Python, but there are plenty of Threadless shirts with innocent looking critters which are deadly, there are plenty of hot topic shirts with a cute-but-slightly-deranged character giving this same message, and there has been a woot shirt SPECIFICALLY about cannibal/killer rabbits. Saying this is nothing like those should forfeit your right to vote here. Because it's clear you are just clicking buttons randomly and not looking at the items.

Re: Harmless

Imitation is the greatest form of flattery! Keep up the good work sir.

juicki wrote:Imitation is the greatest form of flattery! Keep up the good work sir.

The good work of imitating, or the good work of flattering?

Spiritgreen wrote:Ramy you take a lot of flak for your designs so I'm sure you've developed a thick skin, but it must be a little bit satisfying to see other people flat out trying to copy your style this week and finding it's -not- so easy to do.

Actually, judging by the sheer number of entries of similar quality to this, it seems that the style is incredibly easy to do...

AdderXYU wrote:This is the thing.

This is not remotely unique. Fable's wasn't unique, and this is the same style, same basic concept. OOH KILLER RABBIT.

I think people are getting hung up on Monty Python when really, anyone who has ever woken up and said "damn, it's nice to have eyes" has seen this shirt before. Think back to that nice facepainted juggalo girl who pouted as she gave you thirty cents back at the local qwikmart (and maybe beamed when you bought a faygo). She was wearing this same shirt. Remember when you stumbled into hot topic because you thought it was the entrance to forever21 by mistake? This shirt was on the walls. Remember last year when you went to shirt.woot? Yep, this was definitely for sale. It's a poorly conceived slogan shirt for the alienated post-goth overpriviledged glittervamp fan. It's happy bunny with bones. It's Emily the Strange with ears. It's fablefire with a human skull instead of what is presumably a bunny's (though when you get this deformed in your "art" really where does the line stop?)... It's all just one more "I don't fit in, look at my shirt, it's so creepy and cute JUST LIKE ME please call me Bella Namaste because Susan just doesn't speak to my dark miasma of a soul."

But it's also poorly executed. Look at that text. Defend that text. I dare you to do so and look educated. It's uncreatively executed. There are hundreds of entries here that are on theme and don't use this same exact formula going on in every single win from these two. As for the concept itself? Sure, you can trace it back to Monty Python, but there are plenty of Threadless shirts with innocent looking critters which are deadly, there are plenty of hot topic shirts with a cute-but-slightly-deranged character giving this same message, and there has been a woot shirt SPECIFICALLY about cannibal/killer rabbits. Saying this is nothing like those should forfeit your right to vote here. Because it's clear you are just clicking buttons randomly and not looking at the items.

Uh... this...

i love it. i hope it wins will buy one for sure.

Re: Harmless

I knew it had to be but even still it shocks me when woot makes the right call.

AdderXYU wrote:This is the thing.

This is not remotely unique. Fable's wasn't unique, and this is the same style, same basic concept. OOH KILLER RABBIT.

I think people are getting hung up on Monty Python when really, anyone who has ever woken up and said "damn, it's nice to have eyes" has seen this shirt before. Think back to that nice facepainted juggalo girl who pouted as she gave you thirty cents back at the local qwikmart (and maybe beamed when you bought a faygo). She was wearing this same shirt. Remember when you stumbled into hot topic because you thought it was the entrance to forever21 by mistake? This shirt was on the walls. Remember last year when you went to shirt.woot? Yep, this was definitely for sale. It's a poorly conceived slogan shirt for the alienated post-goth overpriviledged glittervamp fan. It's happy bunny with bones. It's Emily the Strange with ears. It's fablefire with a human skull instead of what is presumably a bunny's (though when you get this deformed in your "art" really where does the line stop?)... It's all just one more "I don't fit in, look at my shirt, it's so creepy and cute JUST LIKE ME please call me Bella Namaste because Susan just doesn't speak to my dark miasma of a soul."

But it's also poorly executed. Look at that text. Defend that text. I dare you to do so and look educated. It's uncreatively executed. There are hundreds of entries here that are on theme and don't use this same exact formula going on in every single win from these two. As for the concept itself? Sure, you can trace it back to Monty Python, but there are plenty of Threadless shirts with innocent looking critters which are deadly, there are plenty of hot topic shirts with a cute-but-slightly-deranged character giving this same message, and there has been a woot shirt SPECIFICALLY about cannibal/killer rabbits. Saying this is nothing like those should forfeit your right to vote here. Because it's clear you are just clicking buttons randomly and not looking at the items.

Wall of text crits for OVER 9000

Re: Harmless

Thank you Woot!

Shame it was rejected, it was a definite buy in my book.

Re: Harmless

$#*% you woot. I am done buying shirts from you. You take the best shirt that has been on the site in six months and reject it. I have bought 35 shirts from this site, but no more. You continue to let scum like Mrwednesday and Adder spread hate for things that the general public wants. Your sales of derby shirts has gone down (despite a sharp increase in traffic to the site). You reject many shirts for invalid reasons. You should probably just change your weekly rules to "no Ramyb" because it is obvious that that is what you are doing. Now you reject this shirt. My wife is going to actually cry when she sees that you have rejected this shirt, because it was her favorite design since Listen to your Conscience http://shirt.woot.com/blog/viewentry.aspx?id=8901 almost a year ago.

raevynpheather wrote:$#*% you woot. I am done buying shirts from you. You take the best shirt that has been on the site in six months and reject it. I have bought 35 shirts from this site, but no more. You continue to let scum like Mrwednesday and Adder spread hate for things that the general public wants. Your sales of derby shirts has gone down (despite a sharp increase in traffic to the site). You reject many shirts for invalid reasons. You should probably just change your weekly rules to "no Ramyb" because it is obvious that that is what you are doing. Now you reject this shirt. My wife is going to actually cry when she sees that you have rejected this shirt, because it was her favorite design since Listen to your Conscience http://shirt.woot.com/blog/viewentry.aspx?id=8901 almost a year ago.

Your projected persecution complex is sorely misaimed. Considering that RamyB and Sekiyoku (for they really can't be separated as two individuals) still have two shirts in the fog, a third on the brink, and three in the reckoning, there is not some big anti-Ramy conspiracy going on here at woot. Quite the opposite, the two groups have a rather symbiotic relationship, since the shirts sell well, which benefits both the designers and shirt woot. However, this is very clearly the same concept as a shirt that was already printed by woot, and shirts have been rejected for less similarity than this possesses. The rules apply to everyone, and they apply to every shirt, and in this instance they were fairly enforced.

raevynpheather wrote:$#*% you woot. I am done buying shirts from you. You take the best shirt that has been on the site in six months and reject it. I have bought 35 shirts from this site, but no more. You continue to let scum like Mrwednesday and Adder spread hate for things that the general public wants. Your sales of derby shirts has gone down (despite a sharp increase in traffic to the site). You reject many shirts for invalid reasons. You should probably just change your weekly rules to "no Ramyb" because it is obvious that that is what you are doing. Now you reject this shirt. My wife is going to actually cry when she sees that you have rejected this shirt, because it was her favorite design since Listen to your Conscience http://shirt.woot.com/blog/viewentry.aspx?id=8901 almost a year ago.

I can just imagine the spit flying onto the computer screen as this was furiously typed out.

Not to be mean or anything, but if your wife is crying over a SHIRT DESIGN...well, that needs looking into. :/ Quit the drama.

raevynpheather wrote:$#*% you woot. I am done buying shirts from you. You take the best shirt that has been on the site in six months and reject it. I have bought 35 shirts from this site, but no more. You continue to let scum like Mrwednesday and Adder spread hate for things that the general public wants. Your sales of derby shirts has gone down (despite a sharp increase in traffic to the site). You reject many shirts for invalid reasons. You should probably just change your weekly rules to "no Ramyb" because it is obvious that that is what you are doing. Now you reject this shirt. My wife is going to actually cry when she sees that you have rejected this shirt, because it was her favorite design since Listen to your Conscience http://shirt.woot.com/blog/viewentry.aspx?id=8901 almost a year ago.

You're kidding, right? The designer that has two shirts in the fog plus one in the reckoning? And that's not even including sekiyoku's designs, his "dream team" partner, who together win almost every single derby they enter into (sometimes multiple times a week)?

I do hope your post was sarcastic or else I fear for man kind.

I'm extremely sad that this shirt was rejected. While the other shirt is similar in design, I feel like (in large part due to the text) they send completely different messages.

I absolutely love this shirt. Here's to hoping I see it pop up somewhere else.

Thank you for rejecting this shirt and showing that the rules really do apply to everyone. And for everyone who's freaking out about its rejection, just look at the numerous identical shirts linked above. I think you'll be fine with one of those.

MaliceKaiser wrote:[ramyb and sekiyoku] together win almost every single derby they enter into (sometimes multiple times a week)?

Your statement is incorrect In the last 4 months only 4 ramby shirts have come up for sale. In that same time 3 tjost, 3 tgentry, and 3 drakxxx designs have all been for sale. patrickspen has had a total of 7 shirts come of for sale during the same period. Ramby may be in the fog often, but he doesn't win as often as people believe.

raevynpheather wrote:$#*% you woot. I am done buying shirts from you. You take the best shirt that has been on the site in six months and reject it. I have bought 35 shirts from this site, but no more. You continue to let scum like Mrwednesday and Adder spread hate for things that the general public wants. Your sales of derby shirts has gone down (despite a sharp increase in traffic to the site). You reject many shirts for invalid reasons. You should probably just change your weekly rules to "no Ramyb" because it is obvious that that is what you are doing. Now you reject this shirt. My wife is going to actually cry when she sees that you have rejected this shirt, because it was her favorite design since Listen to your Conscience http://shirt.woot.com/blog/viewentry.aspx?id=8901 almost a year ago.

Bye.

Lagbert wrote:Your statement is incorrect In the last 4 months only 4 ramby shirts have come up for sale. In that same time 3 tjost, 3 tgentry, and 3 drakxxx designs have all been for sale. patrickspen has had a total of 7 shirts come of for sale during the same period. Ramby may be in the fog often, but he doesn't win as often as people believe.

How many derbies has he entered in the last four months, four? I am not a Ramyb or seki hater, I know I own at least one shirt by each of them. I admit that I don't fallow the derby closely. I am not an artist by any stretch of the imagination so I really dont care who wins, it wont be me.

I am just sayin' every time I see his work in a derby, it wins.

Re: Harmless

1.) If someone is good enough at designing shirts that everyone wants to buy them they deserve to win.
2.) I do think its a shame because I would have bought this shirt. When I showed it to my co-worker he went and voted of it right away. It would have been super popular.
3.) Woot ultimatly has the right to not produce whatever they would like because in spite of the derby allowing people to vote for what they want, woot doesn't have to produce a shirt for whatever reason they so choose.

I agree for the most part with the people who are angered that this got rejected. The truth no matter how you look at it is that Ramy and Seki receive a lot more scrutiny than any other artist due to the "bloc" of people who inherently dislike their designs. This reason alone is enough to generate endless controversies about the legitimacy of their design that almost always ends in people clamoring for its rejection on whatever grounds (off topic, similar shirt exists). But these people are biased; they would do anything to drive these artists off Woot.

My point is there are probably 20 other well-performing shirts that could be rejected right now based on the BROAD and NON-SPECIFIC definition of a "similar shirt" that Woot just set with this rejection. So now, no matter the context or presentation, all carnivorous rabbits are off-limits. Okay, how about talking vegetables with faces? I'd love to get rid of those. How about anything with a turtle and rabbit engaged in some sort of competition? How about kiwis contemplating their existence with respect to kiwifruit? Are these not as generalized as the concept of a carnivorous rabbit?

It's not an issue of whether you like or support this design, just that all designs be treated equally. I'm disappointed that Woot gave in to popular forum pressure and opted for appeasement.

DarkDrag0n wrote:
It's not an issue of whether you like or support this design, just that all designs be treated equally. I'm disappointed that Woot gave in to popular forum pressure and opted for appeasement.

Here's why I think this shirt was rejected, and why it was the right call. Based on past rejections it easily qualifies for the "similar shirts exist" rule, the similar shirts being at other sites and possibly at this one. The issue isn't that similar characters exist, it's the entire design that is too similar. Visually this is a rabbit standing next to bones with some text, which covers most of those Monty Python shirts. The concept is that the rabbit is carnivorous, which is in those other shirts as well. So what is in this design that isn't in the others, conceptually or visually? The words on the slogan are different. Given woot's feelings on slogans, I don't think that's enough. If it were then the following week you could feasibly resubmit another carnivorous rabbit next to bones and have it say "tastes like chicken" and the following week something else. I don't think adding or altering a slogan is enough on it's own to distinguish a design from others. Fable proved that you could use virtually the same character in a slightly modified situation and get it past rejection. I think if this had just that one additional element or concept (that wasn't a different slogan) it wouldn't have been rejected. I could see this getting resubbed with an alteration that adds to the concept and makes it unique in some way. I completely get what you're saying about this artist being under extra scrutiny, but on this particular shirt I think woot made the right call. Fortunately for fans of Ramy he has a great entry still fogged right now.

Lagbert wrote:Your statement is incorrect In the last 4 months only 4 ramby shirts have come up for sale. In that same time 3 tjost, 3 tgentry, and 3 drakxxx designs have all been for sale. patrickspen has had a total of 7 shirts come of for sale during the same period. Ramby may be in the fog often, but he doesn't win as often as people believe.

So let me get this straight. You readily admit Ramy's shirts get printed more often than 75% of the other top contenders on this website that you can name, EVEN though he's submitting much less often lately, and you're complaining... why?

MaliceKaiser wrote:So let me get this straight. You readily admit Ramy's shirts get printed more often than 75% of the other top contenders on this website that you can name, EVEN though he's submitting much less often lately, and you're complaining... why?

Because he is submitting less often. He is submitting less often due to people hating on him and Woot's added rules that appear to be directed strait at him. He wins with bunnies, we get the no bunnies rule, he wins with a video game, we get no video games rule. The fact is that Woot gives off the appearance of hating their best seller, and that is sad, and just plain piss poor business sense.

And then the best entry on this site in 6 months, the shirt that would have sold out by 8am tomorrow morning, gets rejected for one of the loosest interpretations of "similar shirts exist" that I have seen in a year.

No, woot is definitely not out to get him.

Ramyb, when you make your own site let us know and we can ditch this used to be good site.

raevynpheather wrote:And then the best entry on this site in 6 months, the shirt that would have sold out by 8am tomorrow morning, gets rejected for one of the loosest interpretations of "similar shirts exist" that I have seen in a year.

No, woot is definitely not out to get him.

Ramyb, when you make your own site let us know and we can ditch this used to be good site.

raevynpheather, never change.

mrwednesday wrote:raevynpheather, never change.

I'm sure he or she never will XD ^_^

raevynpheather wrote:
And then the best entry on this site in 6 months, the shirt that would have sold out by 8am tomorrow morning, gets rejected for one of the loosest interpretations of "similar shirts exist" that I have seen in a year.

No, woot is definitely not out to get him.

Of course! That's the only way to explain why every single one of his shirts is always and automatically rejected, and he's never had a single shirt ever printed! Has anyone broken this to the press??

Re: Harmless

I vote that ramyb uploads every single one of his rejected shirts on cafepress or somewhere similar. xD