The hummingbird design at the centre of a plagiarism tussle between Woolworths and artist Euodia Roets. The hummingbird design at the centre of a plagiarism tussle between Woolworths and artist Euodia Roets.
Johannesburg - The plagiarism complaint against Woolworths has no merit, according to the copyright owner of the photo at the centre of the row.
The ruckus erupted last week after Euodia Roets, an artist, accused Woolworths of stealing her design of a hummingbird by using a similar one on some of its scatter cushions, but Woolworths denied the claim.
However, Roets later wrote on her blog that she had used another artist’s photograph for her own design, the work of Ralph Scott. His son, Gregory Scott, now owns the copyright.
Scott said both Woolworths’ and Roets’s hummingbird were clearly derivative of his father’s photograph.
“But if they’re both derived from the image to which I hold the copyright, nobody’s rights have been violated, presumably, assuming that they both got permission from me.
“Obviously, both being derived from the same source image, they will bear a strong resemblance to each other.”
Scott said he hadn’t strongly enforced copyright on the image, but generally gave permission to those who asked for it. “I’ve routinely given artists who asked permission to use the photo, usually with the stipulation that they make their own creative interpretation, so that it’s not merely a copy,” said Scott.
“To me it is clear that nobody is at fault here, except those who are leaping to conclusions, and making harsh judgments based on prejudices against capitalism and big business,” said Scott.
He said it was impossible for him to tell if either artist had actually asked his permission before using the image, as he had not kept clear records.
“If anything, the artist that Woolworths selected has done less ‘copying’ and more ‘interpretation’, in my opinion. So I’m in full support of Woolworths in their selection and use of this image.” - The Star