Thoughts on The Solo movie poster plagiarism accusations?

Moviefreak

Legendary Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Edit: I know this was brought up in the Solo pre release thread, but I figure the discussion could have its own thread and not detail story discussions and such... I think a debate thread over this topic could keep from going off topic in that thread.

79DBDC4F-56D5-459F-813B-26FB6528B77F.jpeg

Read the story here:
https://www.google.com/amp/comicboo...a-star-wars-story-posters-stolen-plagiarized/

I have to say it really doesn’t look too good for Disney here. Way too similar in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Certainly begs the question what agency was hired to do this part of the marketing and how/why would they have made it literally identical. What's odd is there is zero effort to obfuscate it.
 
I could see how some random person on the internet that is trying to come up with something to advertise their little project could think that it would be no big deal to copy some CD covers from some albums only released in France, but it seems a professional graphic artist would know better.
 
If there was no manipulation of the colors in that image then someone did some blatant copying. The shades of the colors are just WAY too close for that to be an "oops". Combine that with the style of the words with images inside and the even the background color, there are just too many points of matching. Someone is losing their job and someone is getting a surprise payday for a set of obscure covers they did for probably a couple hundred bucks.
 
Certainly begs the question what agency was hired to do this part of the marketing and how/why would they have made it literally identical. What's odd is there is zero effort to obfuscate it.

Sad thing is the design firm has a pretty good resume of films that they handled marketing for. They have the obvious talent to not have to go this route:
https://www.bltomato.com
 
Before I worked in film, I worked as a designer. I was the last generation of designers who went to a four year college, learned art history, and were taught to actually use some problem solving and creative combo to cook up designs.

These days, designers are pumped out by certification academies that assume if they can teach you photoshop, you're a designer. I certainly would look to other designs for inspiration and ideas-- and even totally ripped stuff off if I really loved it-- but generally I followed the rule of 2. If you copy the font and the color scheme, have your own layout and elements. If you copy the layout and color, don't use the same fonts. Generally, working with your own assets you'd end up doing something original, or let it lead you to something new.

That's not how the younger generation of designers see it. Not ALL of them mind you-- but the ones who coast certainly do. My GF is an illustrator who is ripped off constantly to the point of having an IP lawyer on retainer. I really don't want to be a "kids today" person, but the generation raised on the internet think that if something is online, it's fair use to copy/resell/bootleg/whatever.

And just to play devil's advocate-- I know people who have worked at BLT. Like most ad agencies that work in media, they work people to the bone. This could have been the result of an entire team of junior designers pitching ideas for days, and at 3AM the day before they had to pitch to the art director, when they were exhausted, burnt out, fearing for their job, and still one comp short to pitch-- maybe they looked at a CD on their desk and said-- I'll just copy that to fill things out.

And oops-- it got picked.

Odds are though, it was a lazy art director who gave the CDs to a JR designer and said "make it like this, no one will know or care." SURELY THERE'S NO OVERLAP BETWEEN STAR WARS AND VINTAGE AFRICAN AMERICAN MUSIC!
 
This is nothing new, the industry has been eating itself for years. Nothing is new, everything is an imitation of something better that came before.

Remember these?
the-dark-knight-rises-teaser-poster.jpg star_trek_into_darkness.jpg

And before that it was costume design. Superman had little "S"'s all over his suit, then Jar Jar Drek had little delta symbols on the uniforms. I'm surprised the First Order officers didn't have little "SW"'s on their uniforms.
 
It's obvious that the posters were lifted from the CD design. Whether or not it is plagiarism is something else completely. It almost certainly is a derivative work and not legal unless...

...if (and that's a big if) the design was licensed - or some agreement was made with Sony (the copyright holder) - then the folks did the right thing. It would be unfortunate that Sony didn't notify the original artist; but, it is (most likely) Sony's work to do with as they please.

Most likely, some artist at BLT (aka not DIsney) ripped off the design; and Disney ultimately approved it. Does that make Disney liable or does that fall back on the designer - BLT Communications? I don't think it's fair that Disney shoulder the blame in this case.

Of course the current climate at the RPF with the venom and outright hate being sewn against Disney, some are ready to throw them to the wolves based on assumptions. It's ironic and maybe even shameful that this will used to further fuel their vitriol Disney and Disney people... despite the nature of this very forum. That said, two wrongs do not make a right.
 
It's not like they have the option of running it through a poster database to look for possible similarities or copies.

I'm sure it boils down to one guy doing it and the bosses not having an idea - unless the same company did both.

It looks bad for sure, but it seems to be a contractor at fault. I'm sure that contractor just got barred from doing anything in the Disney empire as well, so they'll definitely pay.

Too many are dumping this on on Disney/LFL and they're not the ones at fault. Just because you approve the design does not mean you're aware of the copying in the slightest.
 
It's not like they have the option of running it through a poster database to look for possible similarities or copies.

They could actually. Every year there's a publication that's a Key Art annual that shows exactly this. I don;tr have a current one, but I had one a few years ago. It's crazy to see how much alike everything looks.

Despite the level of copying involved in these posters, no actual IP or trademarks were stolen. There's not really a legal standing for somebody to sue Disney. A layout design can't be copyrighted that I know of.

If you're going to have a copyright infringement case you need to prove damages. You need to be able to say "this person stole X from me, and it effected my bottom line in this way."

Disney and/or BLT should 100% make good and kick something over to the designer of the CDs, and fire whomever ripped it off, but there's no lawsuit here.
 
For years, you haven't been able to look at a DVD cover without seeing a two tone, half in shadow face(s) of the main actors mournfully staring back at you. It seemed like a tired format then:
. 41AYSZ59PBL._SY445_.jpg Supernova-2000-film-images-8aae3231-e391-4df4-89c3-9bad50c8c10.jpg star-trek-generations-movie-poster-1994-1010190499.jpg

Today, nothing is different:
41JX8c-gPYL.jpg
 
The examples people are posting are hardly the same thing as this. The Solo posters almost look as if the only difference is what the text says. While I agree that movie posters copy/steal/imitate (whatever you want to call it) from each other all the time, this is just so much more blatant.
 
I agree with SethS. I don't see how Sony France or the original designer would have standing to bring a lawsuit here. My understanding is that layout design is not copyrightable, and there isn't a trademark issue here either. However, I agree that Disney's marketing team looks bad here.
Disney can now join the pantheon of famous rip-off artists:

hqdefault.jpg

images.jpg

19010106111_1a2335826b_b.jpg

65reDPB.jpg

demi-and-leslie.jpg

Also consider that the same designer may have produced the album covers and the Solo posters. If so, then at worst this is a case of a designer being lazy. EDIT. Ignore that last comment. Apparently the Sony artist indicated on Facebook that he was ripped off.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...=a.39433891879.47636.589701879&type=3&theater


They could actually. Every year there's a publication that's a Key Art annual that shows exactly this. I don;tr have a current one, but I had one a few years ago. It's crazy to see how much alike everything looks.

Despite the level of copying involved in these posters, no actual IP or trademarks were stolen. There's not really a legal standing for somebody to sue Disney. A layout design can't be copyrighted that I know of.

If you're going to have a copyright infringement case you need to prove damages. You need to be able to say "this person stole X from me, and it effected my bottom line in this way."

Disney and/or BLT should 100% make good and kick something over to the designer of the CDs, and fire whomever ripped it off, but there's no lawsuit here.
 
Last edited:
Before I worked in film, I worked as a designer. I was the last generation of designers who went to a four year college, learned art history, and were taught to actually use some problem solving and creative combo to cook up designs.

These days, designers are pumped out by certification academies that assume if they can teach you photoshop, you're a designer. I certainly would look to other designs for inspiration and ideas-- and even totally ripped stuff off if I really loved it-- but generally I followed the rule of 2. If you copy the font and the color scheme, have your own layout and elements. If you copy the layout and color, don't use the same fonts. Generally, working with your own assets you'd end up doing something original, or let it lead you to something new.

That's not how the younger generation of designers see it. Not ALL of them mind you-- but the ones who coast certainly do. My GF is an illustrator who is ripped off constantly to the point of having an IP lawyer on retainer. I really don't want to be a "kids today" person, but the generation raised on the internet think that if something is online, it's fair use to copy/resell/bootleg/whatever.

I run a Graphic Design degree at a University, and we absolutely teach your first point and never your second point. In fact we deduct points for derivative work. There's a truck load of new students out there who are creative as hell, and make great original work.

I agree about the generation of 'if it's online, I can have it' though. We're doing all we can to dispel that notion.
 
I run a Graphic Design degree at a University, and we absolutely teach your first point and never your second point. In fact we deduct points for derivative work. There's a truck load of new students out there who are creative as hell, and make great original work.

I agree about the generation of 'if it's online, I can have it' though. We're doing all we can to dispel that notion.

Thats great to hear! If you're a uni I would expect no less-- I'm talking about art academies, online programs, etc. I've been out of the scene for awhile, so this great to hear.
 
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top