OMG! I’ve noticed the EXACT same thing. There are definitely more examples of the Argyle Sweater duplicating the same concepts first used by Max Garcia. Both cartoons appear in my local paper and I see this happen on a fairly regular basis. I understand that people can occasionally land on the same ideas, but I consistently see the Argyle Sweater follow Max’s work with nearly identical comics. Too much for it to just be dismissed as coincidence, if you ask me. Coincidence is fine, and even mimicking certain aspects of another cartoonnists style or humor is understandable, but It’s not fair for an established cartoonist to consistently yank ideas from an up and comer. This is nothing new by the way. Stylistically speaking, The Argyle Sweater is clearly a ripoff of the Farside and now it looks like he has found a new victim.
I’m sure it IS hard to come up with new ideas everyday. Which is why it’s wrong to take credit for someone else’s hard work. There’s a name for people like that . They’re called a thief. Even your defense of his work is condemning. You actually agree that he does in fact steal from several sources. Furthermore, anyone with a working set of eyes, cannot dispute the fact that the style of this cartoon is a blatant yet poorly duplicated reproduction of the Farside.
He’s not making you laugh, someone else did. Why support the copy cat when you can read the original author. Why so complacent? Would you give Scott a pass if swings by your place, eats your food and takes off with your car because “he makes me laugh”?
You guys should read up on Carl Jung’s theory of the collective unconscious. It’s another possible explanation of what might be going on between the two artists.
I’m Scott’s editor and wanted to enter the fray in this conversation. Before doing so, however, I’d like to ask about these two Sunny Street ’toons that have been presented. Where were they featured? Could I view them online somewhere? I ask because the panels you posted are dated for 01-05-2014 (Snowman Shave) and 11-26-2013 (Sauron Visine). Yet, when i visit the Sunny Street site right here on GoComics, neither of those cartoons appear on those particular dates. Can you explain where exactly Scott would have been able to see these?
Second — these dates presented for the Sauron Visine cartoons present a problem for your argument. If the Sunny Street ran on 11-26-13 — as its dating and copyright information suggest — and The Argyle Sweater version ran on 12-11-13, that would leave 18 days between the two cartoons. However, Scott uploads and entire week’s worth of cartoons no later than 10 days prior to the first day’s run date. In this case, Monday, Dec. 9 was the start of the week. Accordingly, the entire week of Dec. 9-14 would need to be posted no later than Friday, Nov. 29 to meet this deadline. Interestingly, that was the Friday after Thanksgiving. Our offices were closed for the holiday — Thursday and Friday. So Scott’s panels were actually uploaded into our system on Tuesday, Nov. 26. Ironically, that is the very same day listed as the run date of the Sunny Street version of the Sauron Visine panel. Yet (and here is my point) Scott submits all of his ideas as hand-drawn roughs, and we have a back-and-forth dialogue about many of them. This usually happens over the course of at least a couple days. What i can tell you is that I first received the Visine panel as a rough on Thursday, Nov. 14. I returned it to him on Friday, Nov. 15 — a full 11 days before the Sunny Street version supposedly appeared … somewhere.
I’ll wait for a reply before proceeding, but I do think the accusations of plagiarism are unnecessary, unfair, and unsupported by the facts. As such, they serve no real purpose other than to 1. Harm Scott’s reputation or 2. Promote Sunny Street at Scott’s expense. I don’t believe this forum is appropriate for either. As I said, I’ll wait for a reply before proceeding, but my inclination is to remove the prior posts regarding the Sunny Street cartoons since the facts simply don’t support the accusations.
I am looking forward to Cartoonzer and Tweety’s response. My brother-in-law is an IP lawyer and their argument certainly got my gears thinking, for Scott’s defence. I popped over to Sunny Street because I never seen that comic before. Thanks for the insight on the deadlines and how much work is required to get a comic to market.
Well, this suddenly feels very much like a parent teacher conference.Firstly, please don’t try to manipulate language by claiming that this debate only serves two purposes my dear.It serves a far less sinister yet important function that you are willfully or blindly ignoring, which is to highlight what I believe to be the truth.You’re here to defend your business associate, so forgive me if I don’t instantly believe you as I feel that your point of view, as well as your argument just might be biased.
Second, this isn’t about researching material from one source.Just out of curiosity, how much back and fourth took place when the decision was made to duplicate the entire look of a much funnier and beloved cartoon? I believe the Farside was far superior inevery way and this cartoon pales in comparison to Gary’s work.You simply cannot deny that the Argyle sweater has a virtually identical style to that of the Farside. And quite frankly, that is what I find to be the most disturbing. I was a huge fan of the Farside and I must admit that to see it mimicked in such a poor fashion makes me more than a little bothered.I understand, from a business perspective, your need to come to the rescue, so to speak. But this isn’t an attack on Scott as much as it is a defense of other cartoonists. And this is something that has been discussed all over the internet for quite some time.I’ve come across more than one article written in reference to the fact that the Argyle Sweaterseems to have researched material from other sources.If this is occurring, then although it would not be technically illegal, I would consider it to be immoral, lazy and just plain unfunny.This is not to say that coincidences do not occur, however the frequency of these occurrences, does make me a bit suspicious.But perhaps everything I think I see personally is incorrect.
Further more, I am not the person who posted the images above, I simply agreed that I have noticed a similar pattern.Also, your accusation of me is incorrect.I am not here in an attempt to promote or harm anyone’scareer.As a point of fact, I’m trying to do the exact opposite by defending the works of cartoonist’s that I enjoy.Are we no longer allowed to have an open debate about what we see and feel?I thought this was the forum for just such conversation, yet here you are threatening to censor the debate.What a terrible place the world has become when honest talk and opinion is frowned upon.As for where the work appears, It’s not my place to tell you where the cartoons are published, for fear that you would use your influence to your advantage.I can however tell you with the utmost certainty that I have seen work that was repeatedly similar to the previously published work of other cartoonists.
If I am wrong and this is all just coincidence then I’m sure we won’t see this happen again, or at the very least it shouldn’t happen again for quite some time.
All of this of course, is my opinion based off of what I have personally seen.In the future, if I’m allowed to to do so, I will try to save and post any examples which I feel are similar in nature and will leave it to all of you to form your own opinions on the matter.But I sincerely hope that we are at the very least allowed to have an open and free discussion.
Tweety3434, I don’t know who is right here or who is wrong, I just know I enjoy ALL the mentioned strips. I do sense a VENDETTA here of some sort. I find it interesting that you have been a member since 2013, and only have 9 comments under your profile. Any chance you are also a self described cartoonist like Cartoonzer? At any rate, as you said to me a few posts above, I really don’t care what you do. Continue to enjoy the cartoon if you wish. OR NOT!
Clarification was requested regarding the dates of the Sunny Street cartoons in question in an effort to determine where and when they appeared. This information was not provided. Because the images of Sunny Street in question do not appear on GoComics and were uploaded externally, issues of copyright infringement also come into question. For these reasons, the images are being removed.
Regarding comments left on comics pages, all users are encouraged to read GoComics’ Terms & Conditions (www.gocomics.com/help/terms), in particular the policies outlined in section 3. LIMITED NON-COMMERCIAL LICENSE TO USE SITE AND APPLICATIONS.
Allen Rymer about 10 years ago
Don’t scrape to much….you’ll whittle your arm away…
SusanSunshine Premium Member about 10 years ago
Looks like she broke out in a cold sweat.
Me3000 about 10 years ago
So she isn’t European…
jsab0 about 10 years ago
She needs a little desnowdorant.
Brass Orchid Premium Member about 10 years ago
You should see her Lady Zamboni exfoliator!
WCLamb about 10 years ago
@ Dogsniff -We heard you the first time!
Mopman about 10 years ago
Maybe next she’ll get a brrrzilian.
Tweety3434 about 10 years ago
OMG! I’ve noticed the EXACT same thing. There are definitely more examples of the Argyle Sweater duplicating the same concepts first used by Max Garcia. Both cartoons appear in my local paper and I see this happen on a fairly regular basis. I understand that people can occasionally land on the same ideas, but I consistently see the Argyle Sweater follow Max’s work with nearly identical comics. Too much for it to just be dismissed as coincidence, if you ask me. Coincidence is fine, and even mimicking certain aspects of another cartoonnists style or humor is understandable, but It’s not fair for an established cartoonist to consistently yank ideas from an up and comer. This is nothing new by the way. Stylistically speaking, The Argyle Sweater is clearly a ripoff of the Farside and now it looks like he has found a new victim.
mcnero about 10 years ago
bwaha! hahaha! loved the comic!
Tweety3434 about 10 years ago
I’m sure it IS hard to come up with new ideas everyday. Which is why it’s wrong to take credit for someone else’s hard work. There’s a name for people like that . They’re called a thief. Even your defense of his work is condemning. You actually agree that he does in fact steal from several sources. Furthermore, anyone with a working set of eyes, cannot dispute the fact that the style of this cartoon is a blatant yet poorly duplicated reproduction of the Farside.
Cartoonzer about 10 years ago
He’s not making you laugh, someone else did. Why support the copy cat when you can read the original author. Why so complacent? Would you give Scott a pass if swings by your place, eats your food and takes off with your car because “he makes me laugh”?
Dry and Dusty Premium Member about 10 years ago
If it is indeed “copycatting”, don’t you think it’s up to Gary and Max to do something, if it does bother them. Maybe they know something we don’t.
jsab0 about 10 years ago
You guys should read up on Carl Jung’s theory of the collective unconscious. It’s another possible explanation of what might be going on between the two artists.
chooker moderator about 10 years ago
I’m Scott’s editor and wanted to enter the fray in this conversation. Before doing so, however, I’d like to ask about these two Sunny Street ’toons that have been presented. Where were they featured? Could I view them online somewhere? I ask because the panels you posted are dated for 01-05-2014 (Snowman Shave) and 11-26-2013 (Sauron Visine). Yet, when i visit the Sunny Street site right here on GoComics, neither of those cartoons appear on those particular dates. Can you explain where exactly Scott would have been able to see these?
chooker moderator about 10 years ago
Second — these dates presented for the Sauron Visine cartoons present a problem for your argument. If the Sunny Street ran on 11-26-13 — as its dating and copyright information suggest — and The Argyle Sweater version ran on 12-11-13, that would leave 18 days between the two cartoons. However, Scott uploads and entire week’s worth of cartoons no later than 10 days prior to the first day’s run date. In this case, Monday, Dec. 9 was the start of the week. Accordingly, the entire week of Dec. 9-14 would need to be posted no later than Friday, Nov. 29 to meet this deadline. Interestingly, that was the Friday after Thanksgiving. Our offices were closed for the holiday — Thursday and Friday. So Scott’s panels were actually uploaded into our system on Tuesday, Nov. 26. Ironically, that is the very same day listed as the run date of the Sunny Street version of the Sauron Visine panel. Yet (and here is my point) Scott submits all of his ideas as hand-drawn roughs, and we have a back-and-forth dialogue about many of them. This usually happens over the course of at least a couple days. What i can tell you is that I first received the Visine panel as a rough on Thursday, Nov. 14. I returned it to him on Friday, Nov. 15 — a full 11 days before the Sunny Street version supposedly appeared … somewhere.
chooker moderator about 10 years ago
I’ll wait for a reply before proceeding, but I do think the accusations of plagiarism are unnecessary, unfair, and unsupported by the facts. As such, they serve no real purpose other than to 1. Harm Scott’s reputation or 2. Promote Sunny Street at Scott’s expense. I don’t believe this forum is appropriate for either. As I said, I’ll wait for a reply before proceeding, but my inclination is to remove the prior posts regarding the Sunny Street cartoons since the facts simply don’t support the accusations.
joe piglet Premium Member about 10 years ago
I am looking forward to Cartoonzer and Tweety’s response. My brother-in-law is an IP lawyer and their argument certainly got my gears thinking, for Scott’s defence. I popped over to Sunny Street because I never seen that comic before. Thanks for the insight on the deadlines and how much work is required to get a comic to market.
Tweety3434 about 10 years ago
Well, this suddenly feels very much like a parent teacher conference.Firstly, please don’t try to manipulate language by claiming that this debate only serves two purposes my dear.It serves a far less sinister yet important function that you are willfully or blindly ignoring, which is to highlight what I believe to be the truth.You’re here to defend your business associate, so forgive me if I don’t instantly believe you as I feel that your point of view, as well as your argument just might be biased.
Second, this isn’t about researching material from one source.Just out of curiosity, how much back and fourth took place when the decision was made to duplicate the entire look of a much funnier and beloved cartoon? I believe the Farside was far superior inevery way and this cartoon pales in comparison to Gary’s work.You simply cannot deny that the Argyle sweater has a virtually identical style to that of the Farside. And quite frankly, that is what I find to be the most disturbing. I was a huge fan of the Farside and I must admit that to see it mimicked in such a poor fashion makes me more than a little bothered.I understand, from a business perspective, your need to come to the rescue, so to speak. But this isn’t an attack on Scott as much as it is a defense of other cartoonists. And this is something that has been discussed all over the internet for quite some time.I’ve come across more than one article written in reference to the fact that the Argyle Sweaterseems to have researched material from other sources.If this is occurring, then although it would not be technically illegal, I would consider it to be immoral, lazy and just plain unfunny.This is not to say that coincidences do not occur, however the frequency of these occurrences, does make me a bit suspicious.But perhaps everything I think I see personally is incorrect.
Further more, I am not the person who posted the images above, I simply agreed that I have noticed a similar pattern.Also, your accusation of me is incorrect.I am not here in an attempt to promote or harm anyone’scareer.As a point of fact, I’m trying to do the exact opposite by defending the works of cartoonist’s that I enjoy.Are we no longer allowed to have an open debate about what we see and feel?I thought this was the forum for just such conversation, yet here you are threatening to censor the debate.What a terrible place the world has become when honest talk and opinion is frowned upon.As for where the work appears, It’s not my place to tell you where the cartoons are published, for fear that you would use your influence to your advantage.I can however tell you with the utmost certainty that I have seen work that was repeatedly similar to the previously published work of other cartoonists.
If I am wrong and this is all just coincidence then I’m sure we won’t see this happen again, or at the very least it shouldn’t happen again for quite some time.
All of this of course, is my opinion based off of what I have personally seen.In the future, if I’m allowed to to do so, I will try to save and post any examples which I feel are similar in nature and will leave it to all of you to form your own opinions on the matter.But I sincerely hope that we are at the very least allowed to have an open and free discussion.
alexzabala about 10 years ago
Did anyone notice she’s giving us the finger????
jack fairbanks about 10 years ago
Very n’ice!
Dry and Dusty Premium Member about 10 years ago
Tweety3434, I don’t know who is right here or who is wrong, I just know I enjoy ALL the mentioned strips. I do sense a VENDETTA here of some sort. I find it interesting that you have been a member since 2013, and only have 9 comments under your profile. Any chance you are also a self described cartoonist like Cartoonzer? At any rate, as you said to me a few posts above, I really don’t care what you do. Continue to enjoy the cartoon if you wish. OR NOT!
I, personally, shall continue to enjoy them all.
chuckles30 about 10 years ago
Just before the big snowmaid dance,her Sno-No arrived just in time.
chooker moderator about 10 years ago
Clarification was requested regarding the dates of the Sunny Street cartoons in question in an effort to determine where and when they appeared. This information was not provided. Because the images of Sunny Street in question do not appear on GoComics and were uploaded externally, issues of copyright infringement also come into question. For these reasons, the images are being removed.
Regarding comments left on comics pages, all users are encouraged to read GoComics’ Terms & Conditions (www.gocomics.com/help/terms), in particular the policies outlined in section 3. LIMITED NON-COMMERCIAL LICENSE TO USE SITE AND APPLICATIONS.