Inktober Book Plagerism Accusations

[burvantill]

I just preordered it, just on principle. Maybe if Chronicle see’s that people still want it they will continue with the release of it.

[A Former User]

@Lee-White Thanks, I just preordered it too.

[George Broussard]

@Lee-White said in Inktober Book Plagerism Accusations:

It's still there: https://www.amazon.com/Inktober-All-Year-Long-Indispensable/dp/145217041X

Lee, that's interesting. It doesn't come up in search anymore, but a direct link works. It was the top result a couple days ago. Should be able to go to amazon and type in "inktober" and find it. Still shows up in your orders section if you pre-ordered. Wonder if this is something Chronicle did, or Amazon.

[danielerossi]

Still available in Canada on Indigo. Side note: I still can’t get over how great Jake designed the cover! Though not surprised

[pixel.dsp]

Pardon my endless posts on this topic... but there’s so much to learn from this incident...
I know I’m not suppose to bash artist here, but I cannot help but feel disappointed by Alphonso as I’ve seriously lost respect for him, even if lawyers end up deciding that the plagiarism claim stands. Even in this scenario, I think Alphonso handled this matter so poorly with such lack of professionalism, even when dealing with unprofessional act such as plagiarism. Before this, I had equally positive view of both artists: I really enjoy 3-Point Perspective podcast and Alphonso‘s books.
This is not about “oh Alphonso should have dealt with it privately with Jake”. This about being a mature adult and approach the person in question yourself and have a conversation. This is like any work place: go talk to your problematic colleague in person first, and if that’s not productive, then go to your superior.
Alphonso just chose to “go to the superior” which is the trolly artsy community with volatil emotions. And yes, he is genuinely hurt, feels cheated and believes in what he said, but he also knew exactly what he was doing, i.e. to destroy Jake’s reputation and book sale before it can be published. He didn’t even want to wait and see if Jake referenced him in the book.
Alphonso probably doesn’t realize this but his rage and calculated behavior hurt the spirit of the art community. By commanding trolls to lash out on a seemingly (not yet proven) deserving suspect, he will hurt artists’ and budding entrepreneurs’ creative initiatives to risk putting out a product into the world.
If the roles were reversed, I’m sure Jake would not have prematurely published an inflammatory video entitled: “Alphonso Dunn plagiarized my book.”
May this be a lesson for my future myself: don’t react in the heat of the moment/anger/rage - wait until I can respond with calmness.

[Nyrryl Cadiz]

@Molambo i totally agree. I think a statement from Jake and Dunn is definitely needed here. Though I don’t think it will still be enough to pacify the masses. Dunn has created a lynch mob beyond his control.

[deborah Haagenson]

@pixel-dsp In my opinion he didn't even go to a superior first, which would have been an Attorney. This was like calling someone out to all of the other employees. Personally, I can understand him not going directly to Jake. Some people have a problem with confrontation. He could have waited for the book to come out or contacted an Attorney though.

[Pamela Ruddy]

I'm surprised the video is still up with that title and thumbnail considering the defamation. It's one thing to do it in anger and shock at thinking his work had been stolen, but the comments section of his video is evidence of the damage he has done to Jake's reputation and of how he has materially benefitted from the accusations (all the people buying his books in support and cancelling Jake's).

He must be very, very certain even in the cool light of day that there isn't another explanation even though he hasn't seen the actual book. Surely he must realise that this is better handled by the publishers and/or lawyers rather than a YouTube/Twitter/Instagram spat.

I'm not sure his followers have realised that the implication is that if they learnt to draw using his methods (which may have been painstakingly worked out independently - but are largely common to many art teachers) they can't teach anyone to learn to draw/ink the same way.

[Pamela Ruddy]

I just followed @Lee-White 's suggestion of watching the flip through without sound. Even though I had been a bit sceptical with the sound on it surprised me how few pages he compared and how dissimilar the page layouts were.

Even more obvious was how many pages of Parker's are skipped, and how much scrolling back and forward Dunn has to do through his own book to share the examples - the charge that the order of presentation is too familiar relies on the order he was showing in the video.

It is amazing how damning things look when presented with emotion and story.

Whether Parker has unintentionally absorbed too much of Dunn's terminology to have crossed a line in his headings. I don't know. But the claims that are being made against it that it is almost identical I don't think will stand up.

What a mess. It does seem a good example of confirmation bias. Suspicious of Parker's book from the few previewed pages, a shocked watch of a flip through had him pick out similarities whilst dismissing differences as attempts to disguise similarities.

I feel for him, it must have felt awful. But he could have raised concerns with his publisher and they could have got lawyers to look at both books and delay/stop publication if necessary.

But what he has done instead leaves him open to legal action for defamation and loss of earnings.

[Marta Kitka]

I’m not from USA but recentyly I had a talk with a lawyer about owning rights to art teaching methods. He told me that it is impossible to own rights to such a thing unless you invent a very original, previously not existing way of teaching. What’s even more important you cannot own the rights to the order in which you present it nor the way you lay this out in your book.

@Pamela-Ruddy exactly, that scrolling back and forth completelty dismiss Alphonso’s argument that Jake copied the structure of his book.

[Jason Bowen]

I just checked in and noticed this thread. I watched the video and to be honest it's quite a difficult one. I think if the page with the different strokes didn't look the same I don't think there would be a problem. I think from then maybe he's looked into it for similarities. Maybe Jake could redo that bit?

[Nyrryl Cadiz]

@Jason-Bowen i think the books are already printed? I’m not sure tho.

[Jason Bowen]

@Nyrryl-Cadiz I think Jake as been advised to not bring his book out.

[Nyrryl Cadiz]

@Jason-Bowen yup, so do you have any news if it’s already printed?

[Jason Bowen]

@Nyrryl-Cadiz no, would be a big loss if it has, hopefully it hasn't been.

[Julia]

Hello,

I don't want to advocate for the devil here, because there is a lot of emotions in this topic, yet there are things we know and above all we don't know to consider :

• First, the motivation behind the video : beyond expressing his disappointment in seeing his ideas, design, etc. in Jake's book and encouraging other artists to copyright their work, Alphonso does not explicitely ask his followers for a call out. Has it been intentionnal or not, we don't know (and it will probably decisive retrospectively if this is looked at by lawers)
• Beside we don't know if his work is copyrighted (or can be copyrighted as a matter of fact), which would be the basis of a claim
• We don't know if he made a formal, legal claim
• We don't know if he has contacted Jake by now or if anyone on Jake's side has contacted him (other than Jake publicly inviting Alphonso to contact him)
• We don't know why he didn't remove his video by himself or didn't ask the people to calm down. We can only interpret his actions or lack of actions to our own scale from what we know or what we think we know, and measured it to our own values / ethics / etc.
• We don't know if the other party formally asked him to retrieve the video or make a public announcement
• We don't know how many parties are involved : Jake of course, but the publishing company without a doubt and maybe all the parties in agreement that were to support the marketing of the book.
• what I mean is, maybe Deviant Art did have an agreement and the cancellation of the event is agreed on with their business partners given the circumstances? Maybe they haven't, and are at liberty to do whatever they think best to protect their business and reputation? To my knowledge, they didn't go public on their reasons for the cancellation.
• the parties might as well not be aligned on the next steps to take. For exemple, does Jake, who is an entrepreuner and his name equals his brand, wants to be known for the artist who sues fellow artists? Would the publishing company be willing to take a legal action without Jake? This would lessen the case.
• last but not least, if by now legal firms are involved, it is in the best interest of all parties to remain silent until a private settlement is found or the case brought to trial. In this case it can take years. Also, it is to be considered carefully : it is costly and not all parties may have the financial means to pay a financial compensation if ruled against them, or even if the compensation would be equal to the damages)

All in all, it is beyond us and people on the internet will eventually switch their focus : it is a matter of time. What damages have been caused will take time to evaluate and are between the parties involved (unless this expands to the topic of copyrights for educational content).

What I mean is, there is very few to comment beside expressing our sympathy for either Jake or Alphonso, depending on where our loyalty stands.

Let's wait until it unfolds.

Julia

[Lee White]

@Julia I agree that we need to wait to see what happens next. What that will be? I have no idea.

But one thing I fee very confident in saying and a good lesson from all this: be careful with what you say online about other people and try to get it worked out with them personally before blasting them on social media. The video was just launched on an unsuspecting public and that turned into a mob. That seems to be what happens on social media.

That is the worst possible way to have something end well. For either of the parties. It all goes back to basic things our parents taught us. Play nice together and if there is a disagreement, talk it out. I'm sure it could have been handled in a better way than blasting a video accusing someone of the worst possible thing.

[Charlie Eve Ryan]

@Lee-White 1000% agree! Never should have happened this way.

[Julia]

@Lee-White absolutely. It is a loss-loss game. Public figures (and one is, as soon as one has a Youtube channel with a substential number of followers) should know better. Unfortunately what is done cannot be undone and this is a terrible situation for the other party involved

[Whitney Simms]

@deborah-Haagenson my thoughts exactly. Go through the attorneys. But if you do that, you may not be able to talk publicly about it. Which is what the natural man craves. The “see, all these people think I’m right!”