Rosa Pomar, who has been selling her gorgeous handmade soft fabric dolls online for more than five years, contacted me over the weekend to let me know that dolls, very similar to her distinctive trademark dolls, have been seen for sale on the Oilily website as part of a baby bedset collection. Rosa’s dolls are widely known and have been widely featured both online and through magazines. She has put a lot of effort into her handmade at home business and seeing a big company seemingly copying them like this without regard is terrible.
Below is the Oilily version – the similarity in the face is unmistakable, however the quality appears to be infinitely inferior. daddytypes posted about this issue here, and one of the comments implies that Rosa might be copying Oilily, which Rosa has found very offensive and totally unfounded.
I have just found out that Oilily is currently selling a baby set (girls big supersoft gift set) as part of their Summer 2009 collection that includes an almost EXTACT COPY of my doll. I was always an admirer of Oilily’s style and still can’t believe they’re doing this. Apart from the doll, they are using my design on the set’s package, doll’s tag AND the fabric used for the babies clothes.
What can we do? Well emailing Oilily at firstname.lastname@example.org might be an action for people to take – to let them know that its not ok to rip off indie [or any] designer’s work. If you have any info you can write directly to Rosa to offer your support rosapomar[at]mac.com.
Greg at DaddyTypes sums it up:
The idea of a [toy] with flower eyes predates both companies, but Oilily’s bunny has morphed over time, and the latest incarnation is a clone of Pomar’s, from the ears to the face to the fabric to the tag. Interestingly, within a few hours of posting this, I’ve heard from at least two designers who have had unambiguous IP conflicts with Oilily, and both were basically told to shove it; if they want to, they can sue. Pomar’s situation is clear in some ways, complicated in others, but the reality–that she’s a lone creator feeling ripped off by a global corporation, who has little or no chance of restitution–I think that has never been in doubt. You just note it and move on.