Comments on: Is Emily The Strange A Rip Off?

By: Catsady

Catsady — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 09:56:03 +0000

The other Emily stuff isn't the same as this but it's undeniable that these two are pretty much the same artwork. They're so similar there wouldn't even be enough differences for a spot the difference panel.

By: Jon H

Jon H — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:17:56 +0000

I suppose it's not surprising, if the original Emily image was practically a one-off for a skateboard.

By: miacat

miacat — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:05:22 +0000

i agree with number 34 (Seriously?)

By: miacat

miacat — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:02:37 +0000

no way. emily ROCKS.

By: JamesM

JamesM — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 06:54:10 +0000

Reminds me of another rip-off "artist"... Todd Goldman. He did the worst thing he could have possibly done. Ripped off someone who was very well known to the Something Awful Goons.
http://www.miketyndall.com/todd_goldman/

By: Seriously?

Seriously? — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 22:46:00 +0000

http://www.youngeomall.com/bemarket/shop/index.php?pageurl=page_goodsd etail&uid=2725

http://www.youngeomall.com/bemarket/imgs/save/upload/bookpage/kizC01_t ardy_1.jpg

How can you say THIS looks like Emily the Strange? You cannot copyright a girl with bangs and cats.

Because that seems to be the only similarity. Why not look at every other girl with bangs or cats and say they should be sued for a character with Rosamond traits?

She bares no resemblance. OBVIOUSLY she has changed since that drawing.

By: Noelegy

Noelegy — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 18:24:08 +0000

Why, yes. Yes, she is.

By: mishelley

mishelley — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 17:02:55 +0000

The original is much better

By: sam

sam — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:32:27 +0000

raina_c: Actually, it was J.K Rowling who was accusing someone of copying HER crap.

It inspired Orson Scott Card to write this great commentary: http://www.hatrack.com/osc/reviews/everything/2008-04-20.shtml

I don't know which you were referring to, actually - but OSC's is at least somewhat facetious.

By: sam

sam — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:30:22 +0000

If there is anything the nonconformist hates worse than a conformist, it's another nonconformist who doesn't conform to the prevailing standard of nonconformity.

(Nope, no attribution. How apropos!)

By: sam

sam — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:27:41 +0000

1. Good artists copy.

2. Great artists steal.

3. Smart great artists destroy the evidence!

By: raina_c

raina_c — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:31:35 +0000

Never heard of this character but it's an obvious copy. Reminds me of the author who said that JK Rowling copied her.

By: MightyCow

MightyCow — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 04:42:05 +0000

I told a friend of mine this story, and he said he met the artist, who was a complete a-hole and tried to stiff him on a print job. Sounds like karma to me.

By: Rocky Rook

Rocky Rook — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 02:37:03 +0000

whiff ... over my head.

By: ted

ted — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:30:32 +0000

Yup, it's a ripoff. Never heard of either of them. Doesn't look like I'm missing much.

By: samlive

samlive — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:23:51 +0000

whats wrong with copying a character? putting them in a new universe and exploring other possibilities? I think copyright law is BUNK. I'm an artist and freely share everything I create; all of creativity and imagination have been and will remain open for everyone to use and share.

By: Shen

Shen — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:10:02 +0000

I really hate these character copy cases.
least that one is not as bad as sonic recolors...

maybe theres a reason for this.

though it wouldn't be as bad if that phrase wasn't there or maybe just keeped the same name, that would have been less embarassing!

By: brogey

brogey — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:11:12 +0000

I know it sucks when something you like is a ripoff, but I don't see how anyone could deny it in this case.

By: LisaL

LisaL — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:35:26 +0000

Very blatant ripoff and anyone who says otherwise is just angry that the thing they liked turned out to be plagerized.
I'm an artist myself and have had a few of my pieces stolen before and copied without my permission... it sucks ass and seeing things like this makes me angry.

By: Jill Harness

Jill Harness — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:51:06 +0000

Amber, you can't copyright something as simple as a girl with black cats. But you can't deny that these pages are practically the same from their white mary janes, to the positions of the cats to the text that's only changed by two words. That is a rip off.

By: Amber

Amber — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:54:13 +0000

Are you serious? How do these characters seem similar? You cannot copyright a girl with black hair and cats. Ive read nate the great and this girl looks like this in ONE page of 25 books! You have nothing better to do with your time? That's pretty sad.

By: Sid Morrison

Sid Morrison — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 16:37:44 +0000

clearly a ripoff. It's a whole lot more than a loose inspiration.

By: Colt Seaver

Colt Seaver — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:32:55 +0000

Nonconforming plagiarists. Heh.

By: MosselKots

MosselKots — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:02:26 +0000

Wow...
And the original looks SO MUCH better...
(to me anyways)
the face, the eyes, the hair..
but most of all; the pose..

By: Gregg

Gregg — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 13:55:12 +0000

This is obviously way to close. Are Marjorie Weinman Sharmat and Marc Simont getting royalties from the sale of all that merchandise?

By: DOJ

DOJ — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 08:41:57 +0000

Has the "statute of limitations" for copyright law really run out?

By: graffiksguru

graffiksguru — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 07:36:23 +0000

If they didn't acquire the rights to the character, it is a blatant ripoff.

By: laly

laly — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 06:51:30 +0000

As anybody who ever plagiarized, would tell you...

Ideas, ideas! Why..?

They just float around!

By: Jenny

Jenny — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:41:40 +0000

it wouldnt be the first

http://www.kimbawlion.com/

go to the lion king? section.

By: Corinne

Corinne — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:47:09 +0000

@Alex

Just about the same way all "norms" look alike, you mean?
;-P