Todd Goldman is a Big Ol' Art Thief : Stealing Creativity
by Nate Voss, (8 comments)

Left: David Kelly, 2001. Right: Todd Goldman
This is my favorite story making the rounds this week: Todd Goldman is a plagiarist. Summarizing from about 100,000 different websites, I can tell you that Goldman (of David and Goliath Tees) hung a painting in a gallery, and that painting was a recreation of a single panel webcomic called Purple Pussy, created in 2001 by an artist named Dave Kelly. In a very Vanilla Ice move, Kelly is purportedly claiming that the work is wholly and completely his own from thought through execution, though that may only be wild internet speculation as I have yet to find an official response from Goldman or his people.
I suppose it is worth mentioning that I stole the image above this story from Dave Kelly’s post on SomethingAwful.com. As did about 10,000 other websites proclaiming Goldman’s theft as The End of Days. The idea circulating the blog-and-forum-o-sphere is to simply “get the word out” and expose Goldman as a fraud. The internet being what it is, mostly this amounts to thousands of name-calling posts looking to garner me-too replies and social consensus. Forum posts and blogs rarely change the world, however, so I’m hoping people vote in the way that seems to affect the most reliable change in the world: with their wallets. Stop buying Todd Goldman stuff if you think this is reprehensible.
I’ve recently come to the conclusion of how to make it okay to steal work, however. There’s two boxes to check, and if you have both, you are generally in the clear.
Number One: Give credit immediately to the original creator. Do you think Paula Scher could have gotten away with the Swatch Ads if she didn’t own up to stealing from Herbert Matter? Hell no. Perhaps it was always meant to be an homage or perhaps not. People are willing to let that one go because Paula will be the first one to tell you where the idea came from, and that is important. Credit in the creative arts is very important, and often the thief will be the one to win praise and fame (and possibly fortune), whereas the original creator gets squat. And nobody is going to tell you that doesn’t hurt and hurt bad. Please note that this does not work when one is stealing TVs or automobiles, only art.

This is totally cool to do.
Number Two: Do not profit. In fact, try not to let money change hands at all. As important as credit is, money is more so. And the only thing worse than not getting credit for your original idea is not getting paid for it when someone else is. So if you are doing the stealing, and want to put this thing into the world, make sure you’re doing it for free.
And that’s it, kids! Also try to make sure the original work is not owned by a major corporation, because they really don’t like that, regardless of credit and lack of profit. Intellectual property law and all that.
More than ten years ago I was the victim of something a lot like this. I had drawn a picture or a superhero of my own “creation” (inspired heavily by gritty action heroes like The Punisher) and had a t-shirt made of of it for my uncle’s birthday at the local Kinko’s. About three months later as i was walking the halls of my high school, I noticed a girl wearing the exact same shirt. I learned that she had gotten it from her boyfriend, who had purchased it at “some comic shop downtown.” I also learned that my uncle still had his original shirt, so the only logical explanation was that there were new shirts. There were some rather strongly worded, legally-based letters that followed this discovery, and yet I never found out who stole my drawing, nor how much money they made off of my work (considering the quality of the drawing, my guess is “about $10”).
Locally, there is a story which has grown to epic proportions, nigh legendary, of an art-director who so plagiarized an annual report originally created for Nike that it has been said you could hold the pages side-by-side and detect no discernible difference. And were you to speak the name of this art director ten times in front of a mirror with the lights off, he would appear and steal your soul. Likewise, I’ve also heard a story from a close friend where one of his projects was published nationally, only to receive a letter from an obscure Canadian design firm claiming idea-theft. Canada is far, far from here, and to the best of our research their original work was never published, so we could only assume two unrelated people coincidentally had original ideas similar enough to become linked after the fact. In Todd Goldman’s case, however, there is far too much similarity of detail to chalk it up to mere coincidence.
—nv—

Comments (8)
Peter Marquardt said:
National public TV recently took one of my works and change it a bit for graphic slides that they used used before and during a news report. No attribution, nothing. I caught it and I’m getting about 670 bucks US now for a graphic that they could have used for free according to its license, had they mentioned my name.
Lesson 2 should thus be: If you plagiarize, see if the author uses a special license (creative commons, anyone?) that lets you get away with it if you fulfill certain conditions.
Posted on April 11, 2007
Joe said:
If Canada is far, far from the States, what would be close?
Posted on April 12, 2007
Nate Voss said:
Ah, good question. The States are large, so it is quite possible to remain completely within them and yet still be far, far away from another point. Geographically speaking, Canada is rather close to the States as a whole, in fact butting right up against it in several spots. However, when taken on a more local level, say, the distance between one footstep and another, and multiply that by the our relative placement within the States (near the middle or “belly button” if you will), Canada seems to be as far out as Pluto, which is somewhere on the other side of Greenland.
Posted on April 12, 2007
GCRaya said:
How do people do that? I could never imagine totally ripping someone off, then on top of that making money. How do they sleep at night?
Posted on April 12, 2007
Tom Harkins said:
Iowa would be close.
Posted on April 12, 2007
Enrico said:
I’m sure Pentagram profited from the Swatch adverts…maybe we should say rule #2 is only in force if rule #1 is observed.
rule #3: Don’t talk about Fight Club.
Posted on April 13, 2007
Bennett said:
From my recollection, Paula created the Swatch work before her days at Pentagram. I’m also fairly certain she not only gave credit to the original creator, but also obtained the rights from the Matter estate.
Posted on April 16, 2007
ManBear said:
but don’t you see, he said please in his painting and the cat doesn’t have a bow. It is like windows having Gadgets, not widgets and placing their search feature in the bottom left corner as opposed to the top right! Microsoft totally didn’t copy Apple therefore Todd Goldman didn’t copy the webcomic.
Posted on April 16, 2007