Video Roundup: Todd Goldman's Alleged Indie Art Swipe Spree For His Tshirt Company

Here’s a video showing a whole bunch of the designs Todd Goldman is accused of ripping off other designers for the shirts sold by his company David and Goliath. Negotiations and apologies are said to be underway with the designers, but no matter how you cut it, these tracings look pretty bad. Plus there was that whole thing where his lawyers sent takedown notices to any site that put up the “before and after” shots. Not nice. — BEN POPKEN

PREVIOUSLY: Designer Todd Goldman Accused of Rampant Plagiarism

Video by Alex Goldberg

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Art Vandelay says:

    David Kelly, more commonly known as Schmorky, is the artist whose work was the first to be recognized as a piece stolen by Goldman, has reached an agreement with Goldman. He posted this release on Something Awful today.


    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

    DAVID KELLY AND TODD GOLDMAN REACH AGREEMENT ON PAINTING

    MAY 2, 2007

    Artists David Kelly and Todd Goldman have agreed to settle and end the recent claim that Mr. Goldman utilized an image and caption belonging to Mr. Kelly in an original painting without his permission. In early April, an internet site noted the similarity of a recent Goldman painting to a web cartoon panel produced six years ago by Mr. Kelly. Mr. Goldman has agreed to pay Mr. Kelly the full proceeds from the sale of the two paintings in exchange for a perpetual non-exclusive license for the image and its caption (“the “Work”). “It was a mistake on my part to not research the source for this Work which was sent to me over the internet by a friend. “Until a few weeks ago, I had no knowledge of Mr. Kelly or his body of online cartoon and animation work,” said Goldman.

    Mr. Kelly has accepted Mr. Goldman’s explanation and payment of the license fee and calls for the internet sites and all interested parties to acknowledge that Mr. Goldman’s use of the Work was an unintentional legitimate mistake and that there should be no further debate on the matter. Mr. Goldman’s two paintings which depict Mr. Kelly’s image and caption have a legally valid and enforceable license from Mr. Kelly. Mr. Goldman has agreed that he will not paint this image for any future commissions or exhibitions or otherwise use it for any further commercial purposes. Each of the artists have declared their intention to move on in their respective fields and encourage their supporters, friends, and patrons to do likewise.


    # # # # #
    For further information, please contact:
    AR american rebel pr
    1509 N. Crescent Heights Blvd. #5
    Los Angeles, CA 90046
    (323) 656-5020: Phone
    (323) 656-5021: Fax

  2. fififufufifi says:

    In that video, one of the “original” images is from clipart.com. Their license info says: “Use the Image(s) on product packaging or in any items for personal use or resale, including book covers, calendars, consumer merchandise (T-shirts, posters, art, etc.), provided such use is not intended to allow the re-distribution or re-use of the Image(s).” Does that mean he can’t use it?

  3. mac-phisto says:

    it means that unless he obtained a license to use the clip art, he is in violation of their usage policy. he very well may have a license to use some of the works that are portrayed.

  4. MonkeyMonk says:

    Based upon the terms of use you posted I would guess that he was in the right in the use of the clip art images.

    I’ve seen that beer slogan many times before in different guises. Sure, it’s lame but I don’t see him legally at fault over that one. The tracings on the other hand are pretty blatant unless they are indeed royalty-free clip art.

  5. shdwsclan says:

    What’s worse, is that he put his name underneath it as the origional designer….now thats a lot of money lost there…

  6. nickripley says:

    More than anything, I’d like to find someone that considers this to be “art.” It’s more “graphic design” (if they were original) than “art.”

  7. magic8ball says:

    I think the issue is not so much whether he has a license; probably in some cases he either has a license, or else no license is required. Rather, the issue is the fact that he promotes his work as original, and says he doesn’t know how he gets his ideas – they just come to him, unbidden, because that’s the kind of mad genius he is.

    Although clearly in some cases (as with Schmorky) licensing is an issue as well.

  8. GenXCub says:

    penny-arcade.com always has a lot to say about Mr. Goldman every time he steals something.

  9. jurgis says:

    @nickripley: There’s a few galleries that have shown his art. I saw it for the first time at the Grove (in LA) a couple of years ago. I kept thinking, “this all looks sort of familiar”.

  10. The HZA. says:
  11. dislodge112 says:

    he’s just Banksy only not as clever.

    Unfortunately for him if you spray it on a wall it’s art but if you put it on a shirt it’s a crime.

  12. forumreader says:

    Banksy isn’t trying to sell the walls.