I assumed it was pure coincidence, but my collaborator was not so sure. He reminded me that this sample was posted on my web site (2004 Year-In-Review PDF), so it was possible, however unlikely.

Further research revealed that this piece was designed in 2006 by a UK designer, while ours was designed and printed in 2004. Even more interesting, Widgets & Stone had advertised in that same UK based design magazine - Eye - for our Singing to the Deaf project in 2005, so it would be possible for this designer to have discovered the project through our various URL links. Remote, but still possible.

Our designs:

As I went through the various emotions relating to such a discovery - jealous that this designer got featured both on Process Type's site and in Eye magazine for an idea (I believe) we did better, to feeling honored that a design featured in such places might have been imitating W&S, to a firm belief that the whole thing was pure coincidence ("great minds think alike" and all) - I had to come to grips with the way that I am influenced by other designers' work... How often have I closely imitated good work done by someone else? Is any of my work really original?

The more I thought about it, the more aware I became as to how strongly I have relied on other's design work to inspire, inform and influence my own. Are you the same way? How many design annuals, magazines and books do you peruse looking for good ideas and styles to use? Or even if you do not read them with the intention of finding designs to emulate, how often are you emulating - even by accident?

And then I had to ask the question: is this a bad thing? Think about food recipes or musical styles: isn't the beauty of them that they are meant to be learned by direct imitation? How about with art? Why not with design?

And this led me to begin to think differently about my ownership of my work... if I can share it and have it contribute to a bigger culture than my own wouldn't that be a good thing? Hmm, maybe...

But then there is an extent to where it really is hard work to come up with a good original design or idea. And all our clients are none too happy to pay for usage rights only to have it be shared with anyone and everyone. They can in fact take rather extreme measures to protect the design...

And it can go too far. I mean, come on, can Comcast really copyright the phrase 'Faster.™'? That seems a bit ridiculous and extreme. On the other hand, did I think up dot-to-dot idea? I am sure I am not the first to use letters/words in dot-to-dots for a 'hide and reveal' effect, so what right do I have to get touchy?

Maybe stealing is sharing after all...

What do you think?

(to further my point, I am adding the examples below on Mar 14, 2007):

On a project for 4 Bridges Arts Festival we were inspired by this poster found in the typography encyclopedia, TYPO: Who When Where. Some uncredited designer created this design on the left for the Neue Sammlung Museum. The graphic repetition of the squares (perhaps a print or a die cut) seemed eye-catching and intriguing while keeping things simple and straightforward.

We emulated it with our design on the right for the Patron Brochure, utilizing the logo as a die cut to hide/reveal the photo behind it.

Pleased with the printed results (and the reponse) we began planning a die cut poster along the same lines. Then we ran across this design by the talented karlssonwilker in NYC:

Now who's stealing from whom? We are.