The "not war" t-shirts are definitely damning. The other ones - eh.

So much easier to steal than creating.

The first one's obviously infringement, but the other two, aside from some words are not at all similar. Moreover, the words they used are so generic they can't be trademarked. Sure, the girls could be more creative, but imitation IS the highest form of flattery.

@Super1984: Yeah. Sounds like they're making a passive-aggressive war, maybe. Why do I feel like pastry all of a sudden?

Too bad it's clear they can't copy their way into a better design. The last 2 purported ripoffs look awful.

Still, they're sort of similar but not really. The first ones for sure. But the last 2, very very different executions of somewhat similar ideas.

Surely he can sue based on that first one. I know this isn't the first time Johny Cupcakes has been ripped off. He's also been ripped off by Billabong. [www.mashkulture.net]

Is there some weird 3rd dimension in clothing where people can freely rip off other people's designs? This stuff would never fly in other industries.

I am the proud owner of this:

And yes, I wear it in public.

@Triborough: As well you should! NJ is an amazing state, filled with amazing things. I suggest everyone take the advice that was given to Matt Damon and Ben Affleck:

I suggest you not underestimate the staggering drawing power of the Garden State, and show up two hours in advance.

@se7a7n7: It breaks my heart, it really does, because creating takes effort and time and heart and to steal it is to devalue all of those things.

@downwithmonstercable: just check out the blog You Thought We Wouldn't Notice for TONS of other heinous examples. Emily the Strange is a notable one.

@happysquid: [www.youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com]

I know the wonders of New Jersey and its wonderful diversity.

So is Johnny Cupcake ripping off someone else with his "support your local" whatever? Cuz that phrase has been around for ages on shirts, and he certainly didn't originate it.

The second and third examples will become more obvious to the average person if they continue to do it. Individually, they're not necessarily damning. Taken together it becomes much more suspicious.

And no, imitation by taking your concepts and repackaging them for mass production is not the highest form of flattery.

I own a skateboard company so I deal with artwork issues quite frequently, and I believe this one might fall under the fair use doctrine.

I could be incorrect, and if so it wouldn't be the first time I misunderstood the law.

Keep in mind that these girls probably had VERY little involvement in "designing" of anything...

Here's a t-shirt idea:

"The T-shirt Business: Foolish"

Total dumbasses. When will people learn that the Simmons don't make any clothes that are worth wearing?

Idiots.

This happens to Threadless all the time too. It's sad.

@jamesmusik: until someone makes money off of your ideas

@se7a7n7: My thought exactly. Definitely a pathetic lack of talent if you're too lazy to come up with your own ideas.

johnny cupcakes is awesome I used to shop from the site until their price sky rocketed...

but damn... she should get sued

@planetdaddy: I don't believe you can use "fair use" when the product is essentially based on what you are copying.

Fair Use would be selling an MP3 player and your commercial uses a 30 second clip of some popular song.

@se7a7n7: it's not stealing! it's sampling!

@jamesmusik: Yeah, but flattery don't pay the bills.

They had a shirt on Shirt.Woot.com earlier this week that got yanked mid-day because the shirt designer had traced images that (s)he stole from both an Iron Maiden album cover and somebody's Deviant Art page. [shirt.woot.com]

What is it with this industry?

I call BS on the infringement claim. C'mon. The phrase, "make something, not war" has been around longer than some bakery in 2005. Do you think Johnny Cupcakes is the first one to think of modifying the 60s slogan "make love, not war"?

To claim trademark on something so obvious and common is absurd. It's not a stretch to see how two people could arrive at a similar idea using such a common phrase.

Now, if there are web server logs that show that the Pastry company was accessing Johnny Cupcakes' webserver than there might, MIGHT be room to talk.

Otherwise, pfffft.

@KHAN!!!_GitEmSteveDave: Nice Dogma reference. A friend of mine had one years ago which I wanted but never got around to getting. It said simply this:

WELCOME TO NEW JERSEY
now go home

Yes, I'm sure everything is entirely coincidental. The typeset, the typography, the theme, the clip-art of a cup-cake in the center of the 'O' in the word not.

@Triborough:

Diversity is so much more starkly obvious when the diverse groups never mix.

@Super1984: I'm not entirely sure. I've seen lots of various Make not war since 2003. I don't think Johnny Cupcake's idea was necessarily original unto itself.

@downwithmonstercable: Just tell that to the GoBots!

i agree its the cupcake in the o, and furthermore I really dont think a cupcake qualifies as a pastry.
pas·try (pstr)
n. pl. pas·tries
1. Dough or paste consisting primarily of flour, water, and shortening that is baked and often used as a crust for foods such as pies and tarts.
2.
a. Baked sweet foods made with pastry: Viennese pastry.
b. One of these baked foods.

@Triborough: Oh cool! Where'd you get that?

Same Font? Same Placement? Bullshit.

The only thing similar is the cupcake in the middle. And that's as far as originality that the first shirt has.

The other two shirts? Rip-offs? Really?
Support you local X shop is about as original as a PTA flyer, or local small business council.

Freshly Baked is every baked item's slogan, like hot of the grill is every low-end chain restaurant's, or freshly squeezed is an ad for Orange Juice.

I'm under the impression both their and your lawyer agree you have no chance of winning a trademark or copyright suit. This is not like the Hottopic ones. These are neither blatant, or even similar.

@salteater: The typeset and typography are not even similar.

@downwithmonstercable: You must've been reading io9's alternative universe of the 20 year copyright.

@Claytons: Even that one's a bit iffy, since gold teeth with a logo in them are actual, but I could see a judge/jury going either way with that.

@silver-bolt:

On the 'Make Cupcakes Not War' shirts? They're not identical, but they're similar, absolutely. It's absurd to suggest otherwise.

@chiieddy: Pick any exit. Every highway convenience store or rest stop. Especially the Turnpike ones.

@salteater: As similar as they are to any other bubblized serif font.

Hey, but he's the one that said they are the same EXACT font.

Looking closely, the "Make [X] Not War" shirts do not have the same font. However, they do have markedly similar fonts - to the point that they look the same at first (and even second) glance. The use of the Clip Art cupcake in the center of the "O" is particularly damning. So, I completely agree with the OP that this is copyright infringement (intentional or not).
However, the other two shirts bear only passing resemblences to one another. I have seen plenty of shirts and buttons that say "Support Your Local [X];" the concept has been around longer than Johnny's Cupcakes. As for the "Freshly Baked" vs. "Fresh Baked," again, I've seen this in far too many bakeries and restaurants to consider this an original idea. The shirts do not use similar design placement or font, and, given that both companies are themed around baked goods, I would actually expect to find this sort of similarity. So, I can't agree that the remaining two constitute copyright infringement.

@jamesmusik:

I think that the fact that all of the "pastry" shirts all use some kind of reword of the cupcake shirts is pretty damning. Stealing 1 idea is one thing, but ripping off every phrase? Maybe their fathers told them about the "Swap meets" that they used to rap about where you could get ripoff Gucci in 1980, and it inspired them to make their own swap meet ripoffs.

@Eldritch: Really? I love Threadless.

@silver-bolt: I'm going to assume that by your font/placement comments you have some graphic design-type skills, but if you can't tell that first two shirts are SIMILAR you gotta work on your common sense-type skills. They're the very definition of similar. It's not a coincidence.

@fenrisulfr: I believe it does in general culinary terms--it's the pastry chef, not the main chef, who'd be making the things. However, the "pastry" has to be in there anyway because it's the name of the company.

@bonzombiekitty: I would agree, and I think that's why it'll be a tough legal case. On the other hand, I also think that the Pastry crowd did in fact rip the stuff off. I just don't know if Johnny's could get a judgment against them.

@wdcr0ck: The first one is probable but the second two are just whining on his part. The designs are not remotely similar, and the statements are the same unoriginal crap that they sell in the Wal-Mar juniors section:

"Support your local X." "X Shop." "X Store."

He might have been the first to come up with the cupcake theme, but let's face it - it was never that original an idea in the first place. Someone else was bound to stumble upon it, especially a couple of teenaged girls. He reminds me of when I was 15 and used to think I'd been robbed every time a song came on the radio with a hook I thought I created at the playground. Or how dismayed I used to be when someone else advertised my super original idea on a tv commercial.

Be more creative, then you'll have the proof to complain.