Lugz sends Apple cease-and-desist over Eminem spot

Jump to First Reply
Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
Lugz footwear has sent a cease-and-desist letter to both Apple Computer and its ad agency, TBWA/Chiat/Day, over similarities between a commercial "Arrow," which Lugz aired in 2002, and a spot with Eminem that launched earlier this month for Apple's iPod and iTunes, AdWeek is reporting.



Both television spots are strikingly similar -- as first noted in an October 13 AppleInsider report -- featuring urban images on a red, yellow and orange background, with black silhouettes dancing to a hip-hop soundtrack.



Larry Schwartz, executive vice president and a principal of New York-based JSSI, which makes Lugz, said in a statement: "If you look at these spots, common sense would tell you that there's a problem here. The Apple commercial uses the most powerful elements of our campaign, making the ads disturbingly similar. We are prepared to vigorously pursue all legal remedies in order to protect our rights."



Immediately following the debut of the Eminem iTunes spot last month, Apple abruptly pulled copies of the commercial from its website with out offering an explanation. Speculation as to the reasons behind Apple's move ran wild for a couple of days before the commercial ultimately aired on network television and reappeared on the company's website.



Ironically, in February of 2004, Eminem's record label, Eight Mile Style, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Detroit against MTV, Apple, MTV's parent Viacom Inc. and advertising agency TBWA/Chiat/Day, claiming that Apple used one of the rapper's hit songs in an advertisement for iTunes without permission.



A year later, Apple settled the lawsuit with Eminem for an undisclosed cash sum that was rumored to have been in the millions.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 64
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,606member
    Does anyone else remember Steve saying they had been working on this 2 years in the webcast?



    When (approximate date) did the Lugz commercial originally aire?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 64
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,464member
    Lugz is simply trying to get some free advertizing. They couldn't win this case if they paid the judge off.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 64
    I'd go for free advertising as well. Unless Lugz have a patent on using the colour orange in advertisements.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 64
    after viewing both adds, the similarities are striking. i have seen this happen numerous times. person pitching the concept uses an idea that was used before and the people who green lit the pitch are unaware.



    apple will either settle or pull the add.



    it isn't just the colors, it's the concept. just like if someone else used the original apple sillouette concept, apple would be all over them.



    someone at apple's ad agency screwed up royally and has probably already been fired over this. apple created a large sh!t sandwhich and they are going to have to take big bite.



    doesn't matter who you are or how big. you can't steal other's intellectual property. whether intentional or not. it's one of those things and they will move on.



    my .02



    chung lee
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 64
    elixirelixir Posts: 782member
    oh shut up lugz.





    2002? give me a freaking break, no one even rememebrs their commercial.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 64
    moazammoazam Posts: 136member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Elixir

    oh shut up lugz.





    2002? give me a freaking break, no one even rememebrs their commercial.




    I'm sure you wouldn't be saying that if it was Apple suing Lugz for the same infringement.



    -M
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 7 of 64
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    Urban spraypaint motifs are all the rage. If the ad was in green Lugz wouldn't pursue this.



    We'll see what happens.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 8 of 64
    icfireballicfireball Posts: 2,594member
    does anybody have a link to the lugz comercial?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 9 of 64
    Quote:

    Originally posted by moazam

    I'm sure you wouldn't be saying that if it was Apple suing Lugz for the same infringement.



    -M




    That's right, because Apple rocks!



    Here's a thought, it was a coincidence. Is it that hard to accept, that coincidences DO happen?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 10 of 64
    elixirelixir Posts: 782member
    apple should tweak the commercial a little. change the color scheme.





    how funny would that be?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 11 of 64
    So, when is Apple going to learn? Just stay AWAY from Eminem, that's all. You don't want to relate your company with people with shady criminal backgrounds!



    Music is, or at least used to be, cool though. But please just drop the ads...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 12 of 64
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    Did Lugz copyright the ad and all the appropriate ad elements? If not it's just another case of one ad looking like another. A VERY common occurrence. Trademark wise it falls apart from Lugz being shoes which are not possible to confuse with computers or iPods so no case there either.



    All in all it's great publicity all for the cost of a couple hours legal dept costs. Cheap in comparison to an ad campaign!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 13 of 64
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    If you have QT Pro, open the ad and use the Tint A/V control to turn it any color you want, I chose iPod shuffle green. When you watch the ad in a different color palette it becomes completely disconnected from the Lugz ad.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 14 of 64
    Maybe I'm not in touch with "kids these days" (being in my 20s), but I've never heard of Lugz before, let alone seen one of their ads. I'd guess the Apple execs who green-lighted the campaign are the same.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 15 of 64
    wilcowilco Posts: 985member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by vikingstad

    So, when is Apple going to learn? Just stay AWAY from Eminem, that's all. You don't want to relate your company with people with shady criminal backgrounds!





     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 16 of 64
    it doesn't matter, that one ad is for shoes or one is for ipods. who ever came to market first would have their add diminished if there are a number of copy catters using something similar.



    it's like if other companies started using an apple for their brand identification. doesn't matter what they sell apple would sue them.



    this is obviously a mistake by apple because they did not vet the concept which would have been very easy to do. especially when the original add is not that old. this is emabarrising for apple and they should just move on.



    apple's whole mindshare is about thinking different. even if the courts rule for apple, it damages their brand.



    this is one where they would lose even if they won.



    other then the 1984 commercial and the sillouette adds, apple's other adds have been quite pedestrian. the add for the g5 powermac, how should i say this, looked like it was thought up by freshman in high school.



    apple has set a high standard for everything they do but for a couple of examples, their advertising has been subpar.



    my. 02



    chung lee
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 17 of 64
    Quote:

    Originally posted by DeaPeaJay

    That's right, because Apple rocks!



    Here's a thought, it was a coincidence. Is it that hard to accept, that coincidences DO happen?




    WORD DPJ... Lugz - smugz!



    Get real... I guess ALL of the car commercials (and many others) should sue each other for jumping on a THEME cause that's all it is! Apple is not trying to sell shoes pal!



    THEY SELL ELECTRONICS!!!! Dumb shoemaker!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 18 of 64
    bedouinbedouin Posts: 331member
    Lugz is just mad that nobody wears their shoes / clothing anymore.



    I own a pair of their boots and I totally forgot about their commercial until it was mentioned. If one of their own customers can't even remember an ad, what does that say about its relevance?



    Sit 12 people down, all who claim to be Hip-Hop fans, show them the Eminem promo, and then ask them if it reminds them of another commercial. I'm willing to bet everyone would draw blanks.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 19 of 64
    guarthoguartho Posts: 1,208member
    I hope Apple pulls the ad. I don't care why. I just hate that ad.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 20 of 64
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,954member
    I have never heard of the shoe brand and probably never would have if it weren't for this controversy.



    I am neutral on this case though, I can see it being just a coincidence and I can see it being otherwise.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.