Earlier this year the Lithuanian Tourism Development Agency announced a competition to develop a logo, a visual symbol, for the country. Advertising and communications companies participated in this competition and suggested their versions of the country logo.
The trouble began when the purchasing agency announced the winner of the competition. A local ad agency with international affiliation came up with a green tree with the word LIETUVA ("Lithuania") written below. I'd say, the visual solution provided by the agency is a matter of taste. But within a week it appeared that the tree is absurdly similar to the logo of the Canadian town of London.
The local media started a heated debate whether it is appropriate to choose a logo for Lithuania that is undoubtedly similar to London's symbol, whether it is a clear case of plagiarism or simply a coincidence, whether to avoid any confusion and legal implications the purchasing agency should disqualify the winner and pick the project suggested by the "second best" participant in the competition.
Some experts defended the drawyers of the tree others spoke of a clearly unethical case.
Finally, the municipality of the Canadian town of London was contacted and informed of the situation to get their view on the trees.
The Canadian officials said that they objected to Lithuania using a logo similar to their town's symbol. The response from the Lithuanian side was: we will check with the lawyers if there are any legal implications if the Canadian opinion is disregarded.
I once again feel pity for Lithuania, its public servants' inability to do their job right, and the fact that we still don't have a proper branding strategy for the country. Some of our neighbours have gone far beyond us in this field.
Why not pick the second-place winner in this competition and avoid all the hassle, not to mention the legal costs?
Trees in Lithuania and Canada. Picture from Verslo Zinios daily
2 comments:
This sure is not a matter of coincidence. When you have a (close) look at the two logos, you clearly see the similarities, both in the tree and the font (which is slightly different). Sure this is a good example of "a VERY bad case" and a very bad one for Lithuania. Sure I am convinced of the fact there are enough good people over there who can do the right job. Unfortunately, the nice opportunities don't come their way...A pitty!
I think poor country was dealt far more damage on the international arena by officials' arogant response to London's position rather than missing out on a logo itself. And from the creator ethics point of view, the ones who came up with so clearly stolen logo should go burry themselves and never offer their services to anyone again.
Post a Comment