“A dispute over the uniqueness of a popular new commercial for the Apple iPod is again raising the issue of what constitutes originality in advertising,” Stuart Elliott writes for The New York Times. “…Bloggers have posted scores of comments describing and decrying what they have deemed to be far too many similarities between the Apple commercial [“Detroit”], created by the longtime Apple agency, TBWA/Chiat/Day, and a spot [“Arrow”] produced three years ago by another agency, which was selling the Lugz brand of boots. In a statement late yesterday, its first since the debate began a week ago, TBWA/Chiat/Day said any resemblance between the commercials was ‘disappointing and surprising’ as well as ‘regrettable.'”
Elliott reports, “…The senior executive of the agency that created the Lugz spot, Avrett Free Ginsberg, to write Apple and TBWA/Chiat/Day, questioning what he called the ‘many similarities’ between the commercials. ‘It is often said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and in most cases I would agree,’ Frank Ginsberg, chairman and chief executive of Avrett Free in New York, wrote in his letter, a copy of which was shared with reporters. ‘But sometimes, imitation crosses the line.'”
“‘We’re very upset,’ Larry Schwartz, executive vice president and principal at Lugz in New York, said in an interview. ‘The look and feel are awfully similar. We think very highly of Apple. We don’t understand how this could have happened.’ In the statement from TBWA/Chiat/Day, part of the TBWA Worldwide unit of the Omnicom Group, the agency described itself as ‘dedicated to creating original ideas. We do not plagiarize, borrow, or steal them, and have a strict policy of not accepting third-party ideas in our creative process,’ the statement read,” Elliott reports. “…In its statement, TBWA/Chiat/Day said, ‘We can assure you that the ‘Detroit’ spot was created without any reference by TBWA/Chiat/Day to the ‘Arrow’ spot. Our intention was to develop a campaign that was a natural and independent evolution of the ‘Silhouettes’ campaign,’ the statement read. ‘Any similarities between the two spots are regrettable.'”
Full article here.
This is perhaps the best thing that ever happened for the Avrett Free Ginsberg ad agency. Where’s the mass media’s outcry about actual products that try to copy Apple? For example, Microsoft Windows?
Advertisements:
The New iPod with Video. The ultimate music + video experience on the go. Buy it now at the Apple Store. From $299. Free shipping.
The New iMac G5 – Built-in iSight camera and remote control with Front Row media experience. From $1299. Free shipping.
Related article:
Apple takes heat for Eminem iPod+iTunes ad’s similarity to 4-year-old Lugz spot – October 20, 2005
Apple’s Eminem iPod+iTunes ad airs on U.S. television networks – October 17, 2005
Apple reposts Eminem iPod+iTunes ad online – October 17, 2005
Apple removes new Eminem iPod ad from website – October 12, 2005
Microsoft’s Windows Vista strives to deliver what Apple’s Mac OS X already offers – October 10, 2005
Thurrott: many of Windows Vista’s upcoming features appeared first in Apple’s Mac OS X – September 26, 2005
Microsoft’s Ballmer: It’s true, some of Windows Vista’s features are ‘kissing cousins’ to Mac OS X – September 19, 2005
Microsoft suffers from malaise, key defections, Windows Vista struggles, lack of towels – September 16, 2005
Microsoft’s Bill Gates’ prediction of Apple iPod market share decline fails to materialize – September 18, 2005
PC World: Microsoft innovation – an oxymoron – September 15, 2005
Microsoft debuts Dashboard Widgets, er, ‘Microsoft Gadgets’ – September 13, 2005
Microsoft appropriates Apple’s ‘brushed metal’ look for Office 12 for Windows – September 13, 2005
Apple to unleash Leopard on Microsoft’s Windows Longhorn; Mac OS X 10.5 due late 2006 – early 2007 – June 07, 2005
Windows tech writer Thurrott: ‘In many ways, Mac OS X Tiger is simply better than Windows’ – May 07, 2005
Bill Gates jokes about Mac OS X ‘Tiger’ and calls Apple ‘the super-small market share guy’ – May 03, 2005
Thurrott: ‘Longhorn is in complete disarray and in danger of collapsing under its own weight’ – April 27, 2005
Windows czar Allchin says Apple copying Microsoft’s Windows Longhorn – April 27, 2005
Thurrott: Longhorn ‘has the makings of a train wreck’ – April 26, 2005
Thurrott: Longhorn demos ‘unimpressive, fall short of graphical excellence found today in Mac OS X’ – April 26, 2005
Microsoft employees leaving due to (and blogging about) malaise smothering company – April 25, 2005
eWEEK Editor Coursey: Longhorn so far ‘looks shockingly like a Macintosh’ – April 25, 2005
Due in late 2006, many of Windows Longhorn’s features have been in Mac OS X since 2001 – April 25, 2005
Microsoft’s new mantra: ‘It Just Works’ ripped straight from Apple’s ‘Switch’ campaign – April 22, 2005
Apple CEO Steve Jobs on Microsoft’s Longhorn: ‘They are shamelessly copying us’ – April 21, 2005
Microsoft’s Windows Longhorn will bear more than just a passing resemblance to Apple’s Mac OS X – April 15, 2005
The Age: ‘Apple’s Mac OS X at least a generation ahead of Windows XP, iMac G5 clearly the best’ – December 15, 2004
Silicon Valley: Apple CEO Steve Jobs previews ‘Longhorn’ – June 29, 2004
Apple CEO Steve Jobs: Mac OS X Tiger ‘is going to drive the copycats crazy – June 28, 2004
Apple’s CEO Steve Jobs previews Mac OS X 10.4 ‘Tiger’ to ship in the first half of 2005 – June 28, 2004
Apple takes dead aim at Microsoft, ‘Longhorn’ with WWDC Mac OS X 10.4 ‘Tiger’ ads – June 28, 2004
PC Magazine: Microsoft ‘Longhorn’ preview shows ‘an Apple look’ – May 06, 2004
Microsoft concerned that Longhorn’s look and feel will be copied if revealed too soon – August 25, 2003
Windows ‘Longhorn’ to add translucent windows that ripple and shrink by 2005 – May 19, 2003
Apple leads; Wintel follows as usual – November 11, 2002
Lugz and Co. will drag this out as long as possible.
Hahahahahahah…
“originality in advertising…”
Hahahahahahah…
Come on now, how many ads are original?
VeRy FeW…
I’ve got competitors all the time copying and “modifying” work we’ve done. And then there’s everyone and his brother who thinks they’re a designer because they’ve laid-out a newsletter in Word — or better yet, MS Publisher. When they finally get to the printer, of course, they get a rude awakening when they’re told the files can’t be used.
Everything’s a version of something that came before. This is a non-story.
PR ….pronounced: (pee are) …..both firms are PR and they’re both getting PR (damn they’re clever)
Please. If TV commercial ads were required to be original, 98% of what’s on out there today would have to be taken off the air. What a waste of time…
I can almost hear the Emperor’s voice now…
“Yes, I can feel the anger growing inside you…slap a lawsuit upon me asking for a slice of iPod revenues and fullfil your destiny!”
MDN word: science
crap.. just crap
“There is nothing new under the sun…”
Eccl. 1:9
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?
ALL MEN HAVE SECRETS AND THIS IS MINE SO LET IT BE KNOWN
IT MAKES NONE – THE DEVIL WILL FIND WORK FOR IDLE HANDS TO DO
Has ANYBODY seen this Lugz ad they are talking about? For the life of me, I cannot understand what the agency can be upset about. Did their ad flop 3 years ago. If it did its job at the time, then move on.
I gotta admit, the two ads are very, very similar. But as the saying goes, “there’s nothing new under the sun”, and as a music composition professor once told me, “we don’t live in a vacuum”, in other words, anyone who creates for a living is influenced by everything around them, consciously or subconsciously.
There is very little “new” in advertising, especially commercial television. When I used to work in TV, some of the the salesmen used a website that had various scenarios for ads that were done all the way back to the 60s, and they would find the one they wanted and then tell us to reproduce it for their client.
I’m disappointed in TBWA/Chiat/Day. I really doubt that no one there remembered the Lugz ad. Frankly, I wish Apple would find a new agency. For Lugz and the other ad agency, they are getting a healthy dose of free advertising, so they probably aren’t really mad. They just have to say that they are to take advantage of this.
anyone know where I can see the BOOTS ad?
Okay, now I’ve gone to the agency’s web site and seen the Lugz ad. I see why they are upset. Apple’s ad is about 1000% more watchable. Seriously, yes, there are similarities, but the principal’s statement that “they are the same ad” is ludicris.
Meow. Cat Fight. Oooh, cat fight….
Hey Whats inside,..I know that song! It’s from the Smiths!
Try this one…
If you must write prose and poems
The word you use should be your own
Don’t plagiarise or take on loan
There’s always someone, somewhere
With a big nose, who knows
And trips you up and laughs
When you fall
And trips you up and laughs
When you fall
-Cemetry Gates-The Smiths.
Are they mad about the new CIVIC ad as well? Same orange, same rotoscoping sketchy look…
If it was the other way around, Lugz copying an Apple ad, MDN and all the others here would be crying foul, cheaters,losers and demanding Lugz remove the ad, apologize to Apple and lick Steve´s boots.
And yet Steve tries to say he is a champion of creative thought and for creator´s rights, but yet it is okay for his ad agency to steal the ideas of another ad agency for his products.
Hypocrite.
Spark: You mean “Ludacris” ? Instead of Eminem?
here’s the ad:
http://www.lugz.com/timeline/subevent/2002/video.html
gotta admit, that Silhouette style is very similar
Funny (strange, not Ha, Ha) that anyone would sue Apple over ‘Look & Feel’. That was the term applied to Micro$oftopoly when Apple sued them over Windoze back in the 1980’s.
Funny (strange, not Ha, Ha) that anyone would sue Apple over ‘Look & Feel’. That was the term applied to Micro$oftopoly when Apple sued them over Windoze back in the 1980’s.
Funny (strange, not Ha, Ha) that anyone would sue Apple over ‘Look & Feel’. That was the term applied to Micro$oftopoly when Apple sued them over Windoze back in the 1980’s.
If LUGZ is going to litigate on the Eminem iPod commercial, they should also take a look at the new Honda Civic Si commercial. All three of these commercials bear a striking resemblance to each other, the LUGZ one of course, being the first to see the light of day three years ago.
Are they really that similar? See for yourself…
Lugz ad:
http://www.lugz.com/timeline/subevent/2002/video.html
Apple ad:
http://www.apple.com/itunes/ads/
Think what you like. I think the Lugz ad is much cooler and original