“Stick shift cars and feelings of arousal”
Wait, what’s wrong with that one?
So did the dog get bigger or did the girl get smaller?
I have to take time out of my busy nightlife to argue.
Lamps and disease
Gum disease and those annoying lamps dentists shove in your face.
Stick shift cars and feelings of arousal
We shouldn’t judge people with different sexual preferences than us. Objectum sexuality is real. Raise awareness.
Photos of crickets and air travel
Obviously you didn’t read James and the Giant Peach (though to be fair, there were no crickets or photos of them). But there were bugs and an air traveling peach!
Pancake batter and cowboy hats
Haven’t you ever seen the morning after an awkward cowboy-themed porno?
a Clifford shirt?
Am I hallucinating? This is amazing! I’m so happy!!
Sweet sleepy scene. Love the way some colors pop off silver shirts.
My name is Emily and I have a big dog named Clifford. I must buy this shirt.
Three cheers for trademark infringement!
Is there something in this picture that I’m missing that makes it a parody? I’m sometimes very slow with these things, but this seems like a straightforward Clifford the Big Red Dog shirt.
No kidding. I’ve been wondering (mostly out of curiosity) how woot gets away with it so often on some shirts.
I think because they are private designs and generally aren’t explicitly ___ (whatever they look like) than any court case would be long and drawn out because they would have to try and prove that a private individual was “most likely” copying their (copy-written) design in order to make money off it.
I think this argument works better for shirts sold out of the back of some guy’s trunk. This is on a major website owned by one of the largest e-commerce companies in the world.
There’s a huge red dog and a young, blonde girl, those being the two most recognizable features of Clifford’s story. If this isn’t Clifford the Big Red Dog, why would anyone be interested in this shirt? Why would Woot make the horrible pun in the artist description?
Presumably Woot has enough risk aversion to avoid deliberately stealing Trademarked characters, so there must be a better explanation than, “it would take too much effort to sue us, so we can do pretty much whatever we want”. I just wonder, and still wonder, what that explanation is for this shirt.
It’s a sweet design that probably appeals to dog owners, so there’s that. Also, as far as copyright, Woot in general is the most stringent in the whole online T-shirt scene. If you look at any other t-shirt site, they all appear to have more lax standards.
In any case, I’m having trouble understanding why this design is bad. It looks nice, the colors are great, and it evokes a pleasant emotion. Personally, I like it!
I happen to work for Scholastic…let’s see what they have to say about it? We will clear this up once and for all!!
The parody is taking the cartoon books and reimagining them in the real world. Emily looks more college age here and Clifford is fully grown.
Seems like an adult’s perspective on the childhood story. It’s very nicely drawn too, congrats to Jeffrey.
Been a while since I commented on here. It appears that Woot has gone to cheaper flimsier shirt. Too bad. I really enjoyed the earlier ones. But my READ and ELEMENTAL MODEL of THE UNIVERSE are too embarrassing to wear. Looks like I haven’t washed them right out of the drier. BLAME. Remove the B.
I think it is a beautiful and well-drawn shirt. I’m sure others do, as well. I’m just curious as to what makes the use of a seemingly trademarked character acceptable. I don’t doubt that Woot has an internal policy, just curious what it is about this drawing.