Is Coke ripping off the little guy?
In short
- Joel Veitch of Rathergood.com produced a song and video called Ninja in 2005
- Coca Cola have made an advert which looks and sounds almost exactly the same.
- Whether this is actually a copyright infringement, I don’t know, as I am not a music lawyer.
- But I do know that it is absolutely without permission and really scummy.
- So I’ve turned this into a short video, filmed in a 5 minute work break in the office stairwell using a webcam borrowed from the bloke upstairs. (Thanks Iain.)
BTW: I’m not just some random nutter who’s picked this up. Joel is a regular member of the B3ta community, which I co-founded, and I don’t like seeing members work getting purloined for commercial purposes without their permission / cash in their pocket.
UPDATE (3rd Jan 2007): Sky News have picked up the story and interviewed Joel, watch this on YouTube. Also a report on the BBC news site, and apparently Channel 5 and Channel 4 news have both filmed something too.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:16 am
That’s disgraceful. Presumably Mr Veitch doesn’t have the money to take legal action? He should if possible.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:19 am
Certainly looks like a rip-off. But it’s not the first time lazy advertising execs have stolen stuff from others. Tell Private Eye. they often print stories about ad companies stealing ideas.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:25 am
I guess in some ways Joel should be flattered. The ad agency that did it probably didn’t think anybody would find out, It is blatant plagiarism anyone can see that, however I’m sure they will just call it a parody, they’re not actually using Joels work just his idea. I’d suggest contacting coke directly before threatening legal action and get a response from them, if anything he may just get a truck load of free coke. Alternatively it does add to my earlier suggestion that you should setup an ad agency and use the talent to generate ideas. The virgin challenge generated some fantastic ideas, yet another agency got paid for it.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:29 am
I think you do have a case where the essence of the work has been lifted. I did some work some time ago where Radio Orwell had lifted the jingles from San Diego KFMB and I could prove the music chord sequences were the same and the rhythms were too similar not to have been nicked. For all the time you don’t complain or take action Rob then these people will nick stuff from you.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:31 am
There was a site in the newsletter a few weeks ago which picked up on this sort of thing wasn’t there?
It’s more likely some lazy monkey at the advertising agency that robbed the idea. It would probably easier to go after them than Coca Cola.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:37 am
What? Coca-Cola are thieves and hoodlums?
Never!
December 13th, 2006 at 10:59 am
Definite rip-off, but no copyright violation - there’s no copyright in ideas or style (in UK law at least, don’t know about Argentine). The fact that the ad is Argentinean would probably preclude much interest from Private Eye and such. But might be worth complaining and trying to blag free pop, so long as Joel likes the vile brown horsepiss.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:17 am
I am totally agree with you, but when the big players imitate juniors believe me no one dare to sue them. Also it’s matter of money & publicity. I believe there is should be a way to protect junior ideas from ripping off from big players.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:23 am
We licensed Joel’s kittens a couple of years ago for use in a game and TV commercial. Joel had an original idea - we wanted to borrow it - we paid Joel. Simple enough really. So I’d definitely endorse writing threatening legal action - it’s very unlikely to to court as they won’t want the publicity and so he should get some kind of settlement, and hopefully not just a load of gassy product.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:24 am
I’m a regular lurker on B3ta and watched with joy as Private Eye ripped into Virgin and their agency after they backpeddled furiously as B3tans took an unexpected (in the agency’s eyes) pop at The Bearded One.
Definately get in touch with The Eye again - Agencies stealing from or not understanding B3ta.com could become a regular column!
December 13th, 2006 at 11:42 am
Thief! What the hell is going on!
Been a fan of Joel’s work for some time…Hope he kicks some Coke ass over this!
December 13th, 2006 at 11:57 am
how horribly cheeky! They should tell Joel they’re ‘muy apesadumbrado’ and post him a lorry load of Ol’ Tooth-rotter from Argentina without delay (either that or they should return the favour and promote Ninja heavily for download on CokeITunes as a pennance)
December 13th, 2006 at 12:08 pm
Plus they should be sued by every ambulance chaser going for advocating horribly dangerous behaviour - If you jump about like that before opening a fizzy beverage, you’ll get soaked and probably slip over and impale yourself on something.
December 13th, 2006 at 12:26 pm
Virgin Coke is much nicer (for my bank balance).
December 13th, 2006 at 12:38 pm
Thieving gypsy bastards, I would find a copyright lawyer and have a quick chat
There must be someone on B3ta who knows about this stuff surely?
December 13th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
Cunts!
December 13th, 2006 at 1:23 pm
Don’t Coke have a bit of a history of doing stuff like this…?
I’m sure I remember there being something about them asking Pulp if they could use one of their songs (Sunrise?) for an advert and when they were refused simply paid for a jobbing songwriter to write something a bit similar.
And was it Coke who asked Muse for to use their cover of Feeling Good and on there refusal paid for session musicians to record an identical version…?
December 13th, 2006 at 1:29 pm
and to think i drink a can of stolen flipping ninjas a day, i wont drink coca cola products anymore. The bastards!
December 13th, 2006 at 1:35 pm
It’s not *quite* the same - Joel’s version doesn’t completely stop with ‘buffering…’ in the middle of the screen. Not for me, anyway.
Honestly, when have ads companies ever cared? Oingy Boingy (if you remember it) was a rip off of All Your Base and even Sky did a series of Stick Figure Ninja-inspired bumpers. Seems if you don’t have the money to fight, you may as well kiss your ideas goodbye.
What’s the story with the National Lottery’s latest ad, with all those Christmas lights? Is it an approved ripoff of That Video (Youtube: ‘Christmas Lights’) or do they just not give a shit?
December 13th, 2006 at 1:37 pm
You see stuff all the time based on ideas from rathergood or b3ta - there’s obviously the Maestro adverts which were a paid for job I think, but I’ve seen stuff on the tube in London which looks eerily familiar and there’s those cards you see in the shops with the meerkats on the front that are blatantly based on something I’ve seen on the sites before.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:38 pm
I’m not a music expert, but if anyone can prove the notes and chord structure are identical then you’re probably part-way there. If Neil Innes could successfully sue Oasis for a few notes at the beginning of ‘Whatever’ then it clearly doesn’t take much to convince a court you’ve been ripped-off musically… the similarity of the video ‘idea’, however, would be much more difficult to prove.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:42 pm
I see what you’re getting at, but b3tans can’t really get on their high horse about copyright infringement. Take a look at any b3ta compo and you’ll see scores of entries which use trademarks or other protected works without permission.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
Definitely a Private Eye case. P.E. have for a long time drawn parallels between big company advertising campaigns and ideas drawn up by the small guy (Barcaridi’s “swimming upstream” advert, apparently stolen from pranksters in San Fransisco, yet worth 70 odd million to the agency who pinced the idea). You should point out that the Virgin/B3TA campaign filled up a few column inches of their column recently, and they should be obliged to help you.
December 13th, 2006 at 2:02 pm
Well done Rob.
After just having the same done to me by GNARLS CUNTING FUCKING BARKLEY, i think we should compile some sort of hit-list and take it to the fucking top
December 13th, 2006 at 2:09 pm
I will hereby NEVER drink coke again.
December 13th, 2006 at 2:10 pm
youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com
moreofthesame,,,
December 13th, 2006 at 2:11 pm
What a con. Pepsi for me from now on.
December 13th, 2006 at 2:11 pm
This is exactly wat the Citizens Advice is for. It’s free and he can find out his legal standing:
http://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/
I bet someone in an agency somewhere is getting a big pat on the back for this “idea”…
December 13th, 2006 at 2:27 pm
Ill find out which agency did the work in Argentina. Then we shall destroy them.
December 13th, 2006 at 2:54 pm
Beat them!
With a brick!
In the face!
That’ll show the bastards!
December 13th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
There might not be any mileage in calling copyright foul on the visual element (things bouncing up and down in flash is hardly a new idea) - but for fuck’s sake, the music! It’s the same! An original tune that Stallion Explosion and the boys came up with and I’ve seen played excellently live by a stonking bank. Damn it Coke. Get your own tunes!
No… wait… they’ve NEVER done that… but I bet the guy who wrote I’d Like To Teach The World To Sing didn’t go away empty handed!
A cover version is still covered by copyright and requires the original author’s permission to be used, released and performed, even if it is a crap flash on t’internets. The notes are the same even if it’s someone else playing a different instrument, there’s enough people who have got in trouble for it over the years. I think they only escaped it with Muse because they were only covering it in the first place - getting the rights to the ORIGINAL tune was probably quite cheap (as everyone and their mum was using some version of it for a while), and making “another” cover that sounded fairly close to Muse’s masterful one is therefore a bit of a legal grey area that they rightly gambled on the band considering not worth persuing.
Good example - Wierd Al does a lot of easily identifiable, good humoured “parodies” (covers with different words) on his albums, which he always seeks permission for, and was quite put out at his lawyers not doing so for Gangsta’s Paradise before it was released (doesn’t even NEED the actual artist’s express permission to use it, so long as the LICENSE to use it is PAID for). Recently he’s even taken to doing it for style parodies - i.e. something that vaguely sounds like something another famous artist would make, but isnt directly related to anything. Sure he’d appreciate the same treatment for his own original compositions (at least, getting the payment, even if no-one says “hey, do you mind?”), and legally speaking, the same thing really should apply to anyone who’s composed something.
Reminds me, I need to get back on the 7SOL forum sometime and find out what they all thought of the ringtone versions I made and if I’m ok to use ‘em
Coke bastards. I’d stop drinking it, but I’m not the one who buys in this house, and previous attempts to get our fridge filled with something that tastes better and is more ethical (pepsi, virgin, tesco’s own (surprisingly good), old jamaica ginger ale, etc) have always failed. When I’ve got a home of my own, though…
Is it even worth trying to prosecute in argentina though? I imagine it would be a beaurocratic nightmare. Perhaps they’re betting on THAT, too.
December 13th, 2006 at 3:01 pm
(PS again - All Your Base would also have been a dodgy one, as the original file author very likely DIDNT have any kind of contact with the publishers of Zero Wing before releasing their three-headed Zig baby into the wild.. the bone of contention here is ZOMG ORIGINAL CONTENT)
December 13th, 2006 at 3:04 pm
Coke are a complete bunch of cnuts. Go Get em Joel.
December 13th, 2006 at 3:10 pm
I’m sorry, but that is totally out of order.
*rant begins*
I once, briefly, worked with an agency whose ‘creatives’ would try this sort of gubbins all the time - fortunately all the account execs clicked the same links as them, and understood copyright laws better, nipping it in the bud. however, lots of agencies still do it, and nobody bothers to take them to rights about it.
As Joel’s stuff always has its copyright plastered across it, what’s happened here is a clear infringement, regardless of nationality.
As Coke is an international company, any legal action can be taken against them as a whole - they may attempt to lay the blame at their *probably* subcontracted company, but as they approved it and have signed off the work, it is now copyrighted by the Coca Cola Corporation. As it is so BLATENTLY a rip off of existing artwork and music, this puts them in incredible trouble.
Add to that, loads of 7SoL fans will have downloaded that track from the Mp3 link, thereby creating a timeframe for the music. Who’s going to argue with hundreds, nay thousands, of people who already own the music?
Also, I seem to remember the link for Ninja being in the b3ta newsletter.
In short - Joel has a fixed timeline of the creation of his artwork, viewed by thousands of people, some of whom own the soundtrack, all of which can see the similarity, and a huge multinational with absolutely no leg to stand on.
He should consult a lawyer right now. Coke will pay him off very, very quickly.
Grr. Makes me angry this does.
*rant ends*
December 13th, 2006 at 3:17 pm
Advertising agencies should make up their own ideas or Joel should get paid as a ‘creative’, in my book.
Burn them all.
December 13th, 2006 at 3:33 pm
Even if they offered payment, I wouldn’t take their money.
http://www.waronwant.org/cocacola
Next weeks image challenge, whats the difference between coke and piss?
December 13th, 2006 at 3:40 pm
I worked for a company doing music for ads for a year or so, and most of the time the ad agencies would have a piece of music they liked that you’d have to copy stylistically but tweak the melody or rhythm just enough to get away with it. Constantly plagiarising stuff did my head in enough, but it was the complete fuckwits cluelessly telling you what to do that prompted my exit.
December 13th, 2006 at 3:57 pm
I thought we WON the Falklands war? Bloody argies!
December 13th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
Sure looks like a clear infringement of copywrite, as people have pointed out though, it’s the lazy creatives working at G2 who have pinched the idea. Coke are probably clueless of this and would never agree to using it without permission etc because of this potential negative PR.
That said, they have, probably unwittingly but they have, so they may pay good money to put this right before it spirals. Then, don’t be fooled anyone, they’ll go to G2 which appears to be part of Grey and push for the creatives to get fired and the agency to pay them compensation.
Good days work for that creative team!
December 13th, 2006 at 4:10 pm
Sue them, dammit!
December 13th, 2006 at 4:16 pm
Does anyone have the code for this that I can put onto… *shudders* MySpace? This is bang out of order and people need to hear.
December 13th, 2006 at 4:25 pm
It’s not Coca-Cola, it’s some lazy fucker creative or account manager at Coca-Cola Argentina’s advertising agency
Someone should contact that agency. At least you could probably say the thieving gypsy concerned may get a a bollocking from his probably equally cuntish boss
December 13th, 2006 at 4:39 pm
Hello all! Glad to see that this is stirring up a bit of attention.
And to Jimbo asking how to embed with Myspace, the trick is to go to the Revver page ( http://one.revver.com/watch/119190 ) and click ‘grab code’ and select “Quicktime (for myspace)”. I haven’t tried this personally, but I assume Revver know what they are talking about.
Anyone else wanting to embed, there’s all sorts of options for blogs etc. Just go to the same page and grab the codes. Or simply share this blog link.
December 13th, 2006 at 4:40 pm
Having just done a module in my law degree on intellectual property, I’m pretty sure that that isn’t infringement of copyright, at least in the UK, but yeah, they’ve blatently stolen the idea, bastards.
December 13th, 2006 at 4:45 pm
The music sounds similar (particularly in the context of the animation) - and will be covered internationally by the Berne convention on copyright. The animation itself is not a literal copy and is unlikely to be subject to copyright per se, but Agentina may have laws equivalent to ‘passing off’, i.e. implying an affiliation with a legitimate entity (RatherGood.com). It helps that Joel legitimately licences its animations from time to time, adding to the potential confusion (and financial damage) here.
However, I suspect that it would be severe hassle to persue it legally - Joel would probably do better to root out which part of Coke paid for the ads and inform them or their owning division of the agancy’s behaviour - he may get gesture from Coke, and the agency may get spanked financially via Coke themselves.
Good Luck!
/In IP
December 13th, 2006 at 5:03 pm
“And was it Coke who asked Muse for to use their cover of Feeling Good and on there refusal paid for session musicians to record an identical version…?”
Nah that was nescafe/nestle, Muse have morals and don’t want unethical bastards like nestle using their music!
I’m most outraged for Joel. I’ll be passing this on.
December 13th, 2006 at 5:23 pm
cunts!
Another manifestation of the unoriginality, hypocrisy and cold bloddedness (is that even a word?) of big businesses. The’re such fucktastic crapjacks.
Imagine the scenario if the roles were reversed…
December 13th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
Look up the details of Tom Waits’ law suits - initially he successfully sued Frito Lay for hiring an impersonator without permission, but there have been more since. There’s your legal precedent for using “likenesses”….
December 13th, 2006 at 5:54 pm
Coca-Cola© shall never touch my lips again.
Barkeep…Rum and Pepsi©, please.
December 13th, 2006 at 6:03 pm
Bastard sons of whores! Not satisfied with killing tooth enamel, they rip off a tiny wee kitten of a child. CUNTS!
December 13th, 2006 at 6:27 pm
*flashback of Virgin compo*
Well really this is a fucking travesty. It’s not like Joel’s going to be able to take on a multi-national conglomerate in court even if he DOES have ground to stand on.
Boo, hiss.
Start a petition and whore it around the entire internet, Rob!
December 13th, 2006 at 6:34 pm
He should deffo sue. The Beastie Boys took $40000 off British Airways and that was over 10 years ago.
December 13th, 2006 at 6:55 pm
Loz, yes, b3tans appropriate trademarks and such quite a lot… the difference being that those images and animations generally are just for entertainment and personal use, and aren’t used to make money. This is something that nicked for use in an advertisement. Big difference in the level of rage it (quite rightly) would generate.
December 13th, 2006 at 7:39 pm
Not knowing anything about this from a professional point of view, but this is a blatant theft of Joel’s work. The music is damn near identical, and the video is an obvious copy. Were it one of the two things on it’s own it might be difficult to say anything, but both the music and video together?! There’s no argument.
Although the advert was more than likely produced by an ad agency, I would pursue both them and Coke, and give it as much exposure as possible (Rob, you should put a banner on b3ta saying Coke are bunch of cunts).
Good luck Joel, hope this goes well.
December 13th, 2006 at 8:09 pm
come on Coca-Cola pay up - your naughty naughty ad agency have obviously heavily “borrowed” from the original video and music.
www.rathergood.com will be happy to accept your payment as compensation for this blatant plagiarism.
December 13th, 2006 at 8:37 pm
I asked Adrants to feature this (a link to my blog rant about your Coke rip-off), and they have, in their digest. See link.
Adrants is the #1 blog of the advertising community, so the word will spread well.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:53 pm
Never mind copywrite, the tune is blatently theft of interlectual property (if Joel can prove he wrote the tune before coke aired it). Also coke is a multi national company and therefore would fall under UK law. Although coca-cola probably paid an ad firm to come up with this ad, they still have an obligation to ensure that the material is original. I’ll get my brother (who did quite well in his law degree) to take a look at this ad from a legal stand point and let me know what he thinks, but it might be an idea to point out the similarities to Coca-cola uk and let them know that this type of thing will not be tollerated by ‘the little guy’ and that if remuneration isn’t forthcoming then it will be open season on Coca-cola (registerd trademark) by everyone with photoshop who are disgusted by their lazy, theiving mind piss.
December 13th, 2006 at 10:57 pm
erm, the idea of putting crap two-frame animations to cheesy music is hardly the preserve of rathergood.com. think dancingpaul for starters. this sort of thing is hardly original.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:59 pm
Joel = God
Cunty Cola = Devil
You work it out…
December 14th, 2006 at 2:08 am
I shall be doing everything I can to help Coke if they decide to take action against that sinister cat molester for stealing their ideas.
December 14th, 2006 at 2:49 am
Sorry if posted before, too drunk to look through but lets have a whip round and take on coke, failing that, lets have a damn good tab at the bar?
December 14th, 2006 at 2:53 am
oh and joel gets 2 shots, woo!
December 14th, 2006 at 4:00 am
Rob, you scare me.
December 14th, 2006 at 4:17 am
well damn if that wasn’t the most joy inspiring flash animation i’ve ever seen.
and yeah, that’s definitely the same song. shame on coke. couldn’t they at least have gone for a different visual style? then it wouldn’t be as BAD of a blatant ripoff.
December 14th, 2006 at 6:10 am
Hmmm… The music is pretty damn close, the anims are in the same style. If you made the video and the song after coke did it’s adverts and then sold it, do you think they’d hesitate to sue the pants off you? No way. Get a lawyer, man. The worst case scenario is you losing all the rights to your work and it’s not that unlikely to happen.
December 14th, 2006 at 7:56 am
Umm… People keep saying that if you can prove chord sequences are the same, you’ve got a case. Listen to the original. Listen to the Coke ad. The opening piano intro is identical. Not similar. Identical. There are several places where Joel’s tune goes into an instrumental break. The Coke ad just splices them together — in fact, the place where they splice the instrumental without horns to the instrumental with horns is a very bad splice, they don’t quite catch the beat. This is a straight steal, even without the animation style.
December 14th, 2006 at 8:39 am
I agree that is completely copied from Joel, even down tho the jumping and the movement in the flash video! That sort of behaviour is completely wrong and shouldn’t be allowed to happen without some repercussions for Coke…..how about a boycott?
December 14th, 2006 at 9:28 am
I hate to rain on everyone’s parade, but (speaking as someone working in the ad industry) ad agencies nicking other people’s ideas is as old as the ark. Sony’s bouncing balls ad was nicked off the David Letterman show, the Honda Cog ad was “borrowed” from a speculative art film and if I could be bothered I could dig out dozens of other examples. The one thing they all have in common is that nobody was ever successfully sued on the grounds of “artistic” copying. Even agencies do it to each other, and complain about it, but nothing ever happens to the offenders.
The only thing that is likely to work is a campaign against the practice, especially one that targets the offending brand (although I doubt that anyone at Coke was aware of the origin of their web video).
December 14th, 2006 at 9:29 am
[…] is coke ripping off the little guy? rob certainly thinks so, and it seems most people agree. i’m not going to go so far as swearing off coke. afterall, an addiction is an addiction, but it will be interesting to see what comes of this, if anything. […]
December 14th, 2006 at 11:34 am
“WE’RE IN UR INTERNET
STEALING UR IDEAS”
December 14th, 2006 at 11:51 am
FFS, are they ripping you off? Of course they are! Firstly big companies do that, secondly rathergood is frankly genius and it would cost them a fortune if it could be done at all to get someone to come up with something as original, and thirdly the money aspect again, namely, that if you take them on, which I hope you can and do, I would imagine that the costs of any potential litigation would still be less than the gain from any potential advertising. It could simply be thought of as sound economic sense on their part. That said, do they have any scruples whatsoever?
December 14th, 2006 at 11:52 am
I thought it would just be some almost vaguely similar rip-off but it is exactly the same! EXACTLY (apart from a few different people in the video and a slightly different composition of the notes)!
I think we should all pull together, donate a tenner and sue the bastards. It could be like a B3ta lottery - those who put some money in, get a share of the millions Joel will win
December 14th, 2006 at 12:13 pm
Im off to buy some coke, Yum!
December 14th, 2006 at 12:14 pm
AFAIK, you can’t nail them on the stylistic bouncing. You can, however, nail them on the music. Here’s how:
There is a section of international copyright law governing music and the ripping off thereof. It states that a piece of music can be considered a ripoff (and therefore something you can sue over) if the similarity between the pieces is such that the notes are identical with a small change every x notes.
The tricky part with this is that x is different in each country. I seem to remember it being every 4 notes in the UK, but only every 7 the rest of the EU. There was, for instance, some controversy a few years back where Gerry Haliwell did a tune that was verrrrrrry similar to someone else’s, but had artfully changed every fourth note and so got away with it.
The music nerds among you therefore need to AB the coke ad and Joel’s Ninja tune and see where the discrepancies are. Someone would also need to find out what x is in Argentina.
If, as seems likely to my ears, there is enough of a similarity, you have a case and can sue Coke, in Argentina.
December 14th, 2006 at 1:57 pm
Fishnchimps, you may have a point, but your examples are very different from this case of *blatant* plagiarism. The “speculative art film” from which you say Honda borrowed for their cog ad was made by the very same people who made that original film, Peter Fischli and David Weiss.
There’s an exhibition on their work on at the Tate modern now, by the way, and it’s brilliant!
December 14th, 2006 at 3:06 pm
Point taken destrasisnistra, but what I’m trying to say is that the culture of borrowing is entrenched within advertising. Based upon the brief given to a creative, if s/he then uses someone else’s idea then the creative director won’t give a shit where the idea came from, and neither will his CEO, as long as it looks good and it pleases the client.
Beg, borrow, steal…
December 14th, 2006 at 4:32 pm
Brew it yourself
NB. 1 batch of 7x formula will produce three batches cola syrup, or approximately 54 litres of cola.
Step 1: 7x formula:
Using food-grade essential oils, assemble 3.75ml orange oil; 3ml lime oil; 1ml lemon oil; 1 ml cassia oil (nb. reduce cassia content for next production); 0.75ml nutmeg oil; 0.25ml coriander oil (6 drops); 0.25ml lavender oil (6 drops); 0.25ml neroli oil (optional/removed due to high cost).
Using a measuring syringe, measure out the oils into a glass or ceramic container. Keep covered to avoid volatile oil fumes escaping. Then dissolve 10g instant gum arabic (equivalent to 22ml) in 20ml water (low calcium/low magnesium, Volvic is good) with one drop vodka - Cube uses Zubrowka. (Be aware that total quantity of vodka will be 0.0007ml per litre of Cube-cola).
Place the gum/water/vodka mix in a high-sided beaker - stainless steel or glass are best. Using a high-power hammer drill with kitchen whisk attachment, whisk the gum mixture at high speed while your assistant droppers the oils. Mix in steadily with the measuring syringe. Continue to whisk at high speed for 5-7 minutes, or until the oils and water emulsify.
The resulting mixture will be cloudy. Test for emulsification by adding a few drops of the mixture to one glass of water. No oils should be visible on the surface. You now have a successful flavour emulsion, which should hold for several months.
Step 2:The mixers
This makes two allied concentrates, Composition A and Composition B, which can be stored separately before being mixed into cold syrup with the addition of sugar and water.
Composition A
Mix 30 ml double strength caramel colouring (DD Williamson Caramel 050) with 10 ml water. While stirring, add 10ml 7x flavour emulsion (oils/gum/water mix).
Composition B
Mix 3 tsp (10ml) citric acid with 5-10ml water, then sieve in 0.75 tsp (2.75ml) caffeine. Mix thoroughly using a pestle and mortar until caffeine granules are no longer evident. The mixture may behave erratically, turning either white or clear for no apparent reason. If it goes white, add more water. Pass through muslin or jelly bag to remove any anomalies.
At this point, A+B can be packaged separately and later reconstituted into cola syrup.
Step 3: The cola syrup
2 litres water; 2kg sugar
Compositions A & B
Make a sugar syrup (mix in a cooking pot on low heat to dissolve quickly) using 1.5 litres of the water and all the sugar. Filter if unsure. Mix Composition A into the remaining 500ml water. Add Composition B, then the sugar syrup. You now have 3 litres Cube-Cola syrup or approx 18 litres cola.
Step 4: The cola
As required, make up your cola as a 5:1 mix, five parts fizzy water to one part cola syrup. Cube uses 350ml syrup in a 2l bottle of Tesco Ashford Mountain Spring. This cola recipe is released under the GNU general public licence.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/food/Story/0,,1832135,00.html
December 14th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
Cheeky fuckers!
I feel duty bound to clutch Joel to my bosom to sooth him. Rob, there is room for you too if you need it.
December 14th, 2006 at 4:57 pm
But, mictoboy, regardless of the visual style and its originality or otherwise, it’s the same music!
However the truth of the matter is that Joel Veitch is a time traveller and HE nicked the idea off THEM. But Pepsi made him do it. Or Shirley.
December 14th, 2006 at 5:56 pm
You’d think the cheeky fuckers couldn’t afford to hire someone reputable, instead of cutting corners by hiring some no-talent hack to rip off other people’s ideas.
But it goes on all the time. Once, when I was working for a design company we were specifically instructed to steal an entire website - fonts, graphics, colours, layout etc.
December 14th, 2006 at 6:12 pm
It would be a sweet irony if Joel ripped off Coke Argentina by making a remarkably similar video but with meerkats and the ninja cat, and severely dissing Coke to the point where Coke get pissed off and try and sue him. Now THAT would make an interesting case.
December 14th, 2006 at 6:48 pm
I wouldn’t be too quick to assume this is deliberate copying…. while the music is similar, it is pretty likely to be a coincidence. There’s not as much difference between pieces of music as people tend to think. basically what is the same (or nearly the same) here, is the chord sequence and general style. Now obviously the general style is not particularly unusual, and if you are writing a piece in this style your choice of chords is going to be restricted somewhat. As the sequence is only 4 bars long, it’s not suprising it crops up in different songs. The changes are I-V-IV-I. I, IV and V are the most commonly used chords especically in popular music, and there are only a certain number of possibilities.
December 14th, 2006 at 11:34 pm
do it. Sue the fuckers. have their nuts on a plate. You’ll get a stack of cash.
December 14th, 2006 at 11:57 pm
Well, that just sucks. I frequent Rathergood.com and if I saw the advert would have picked it up as a blatant copy straight away. What’s next Blode and Mtn Dew?
December 15th, 2006 at 1:58 am
This is a monstrous pile of flange. I have a terrible feeling that there is nothing legal that can be done, what with Joel being in the UK and the ad agency being in Argentina.
How about Rob gets b3ta to have an “Entirely-legal-pictures-that-will-embarrass-Coca-Cola-into-acknowledging-7-Seconds-Of-Love-and-Joel-when-they-go-viral-and-end-up-in-the-Grauniad” picture competition?
PS: Did I see an advert for Orange in the paper the other day with stick men that look frighteningly like those made by Butters (apart from the lack of amputation and decapitation) the other day? Did you do them Butters?
December 15th, 2006 at 6:52 am
I think joel went into the future, stole cokes idea, brought it back and tried to knacker it up to make a few bucks. Sneaky them brits are.. next thing .. he will be suing because he invented the Sixpackistan, where you get all liquored up and jahiiiid into the loo..
December 15th, 2006 at 12:48 pm
Herm. We have IP lawyers here — I’m sure we can get them to take a look, but it might cost.
And I’ve got a musicologist somewhere, if you’re interested…
December 15th, 2006 at 1:14 pm
i’m surprised that there hasn’t yet been a mention of other South American coke products.
December 15th, 2006 at 4:26 pm
Cuntery!
*frowns lots*
December 15th, 2006 at 6:12 pm
That’s a flippin’ liberty.
Go on Joel / Rob, you HAVE to tell Private Eye. First the Virgin thing, then Miss Eclectech… add yourself a little side project to get as many B3tan geniuses (genii?) into that esteemed organ.
December 15th, 2006 at 6:33 pm
lets all stop buying coke
the drinksable sort of course, only problem is that pepsi tastes like pith and is only usefull for cleaning kitchens with
December 15th, 2006 at 7:15 pm
So…the obvious solution is to run a pic compo to promote coke
That should generate enough ire to knock out any cheap ad agencies who come a-stealing again - they’ll think ‘if I rob this idea for my client, loads of people will make things insulting my client and my client will think I’m a twunt’
December 15th, 2006 at 7:55 pm
Coke won’t have a clue what’s been commissioned in their name - you have to go after the ad agency that has commissioned this. Their clueless creatives will be the boys (always boys) who’ve ripped this off, commissioned some guy in his bedroom and sold it on for max wonga to coke.
Go after the agency - they will be sh*tting it that the big boss will find out and be mucho displeased.
December 15th, 2006 at 8:58 pm
If you’re not happy people take it up with Coke’s Corporate Responsibility team: crreview@na.ko.com or better yet a nice man called E. Neville Isdell.
BTW Coca Cola make this corporate statement on p5 of their Code of Conduct - “As a representative of the Coca Cola company you must act with honesty integrity in all matters”.
Aparently somebody somewhere hasn’t.
December 15th, 2006 at 9:18 pm
The agency:
http://www.santobuenosaires.com
December 15th, 2006 at 10:08 pm
I doubt you can do anything legally, but why not post it all over Digg, tell a couple of papers and just embarress Coke instead! I’m sure we could get enough people to see - its just like the Lotto ad who’d obviously seen that xmas display on youtube last year!
December 15th, 2006 at 10:42 pm
I can see it now: “New B3ta Image Challenge! Design Coke’s Next Rip-Off Ad!”
December 16th, 2006 at 1:15 am
All you guys out there who do this kind of animation can get access to FREE legal representation as well as help on copywrite issues by joining a union like BECTU. (Broadcasting Entertainment Cinematograph and Theatre Union)
They do a lot of work for all sorts of creative folk, freelancers as well. I know they have specialists in copywrite too. All sorts of other nice things as well come with membership.
www.bectu.org
December 16th, 2006 at 1:51 am
“The reputation of The Coca-Cola Company is built on trust. Those who do business with us around the world know we are committed to managing our business with a consistent set of values that represent the highest standards of quality, integrity, excellence, compliance with the law and respect for the unique customs and cultures in communities where we operate. We seek to develop relationships with suppliers that share similar values and conduct business in an ethical manner.”
It is a custom of the community of B3ta to recognise people’s achievements in a variety of ways: compliment, ribaldry and so forth. Yet, the final analysis made by all has the ethic that, “commerce in these B3ta things has financial deserts for the originator.”
Coke, in their willingness to risk everything in getting their message to market have simply omitted to pay. Bill them. Not only bill them but do so at a level consistent with a national marketing campaign. Since your first language is - presumably - English, bill them for the original in English and the derivative translated work. Acknowledge that the work needed to be translated for local market conditions. Congratulate them on how faithful they have been to the spirit of the original. Bill them directly. Forget their Supplier, the advertising agency. Tell them terms are strictly GBP (Great Britain Pounds), payable in twenty eight days from invoice tax point.
Add to your letter a note that billing them directly is a consequence of their supplier having obviously not read their excellent document: http://www.cokefacts.org/facts/facts_aw_key_citizenship04.pdf
and taken on board the important message of ethics in business.
But above all Bill them properly, accurately and big.
Bill them for time, materials and VAT - if you are registered for VAT. The items you bill for must relate to the production. If you wish to add in a charge for introducing Coke, Virally, in the B3TA test market bill for that.
Do not bill for silly things that do not relate to the matter at hand.
Bill as much as you think reasonable.
Tell them you trust that they are happy with you work and look forward to dealing directly with them next time
The Coca-Cola Company is committed to achieving
the highest standards of governance and business
ethics. We regularly review our systems, codes and
policies to ensure we meet international best practices
of transparency and accountability.
The framework for corporate governance at our
Company consists of our Corporate Governance
Guidelines and the charters of the Board Committees.
These documents and a list of our Board members
are available on our Web site, www.coca-cola.com.
mailto:crreview@na.ko.com
Bill them. Whoever stole your idea has done you a favour by putting your product in front of a client. Now WHore yourself.
December 16th, 2006 at 2:06 pm
Got to agree with ‘why do i care’. Excellent plan.
I’ve had experience with tv concepts we’ve developed suddenly appearing in production after the odd loose conversation. It’s not nice and it’s not easy to sue over.
Copyright exists in the execution itself, so they would argue ‘yes there are similarities’ but we’ve changed it ‘enough’ to warrant it being an original, albeit inspired, piece of content.
Thankfully it’s coke, thankfully it’s a marketing campaign, so they’d be keen to make this bad taste go away as they’re so blatantly (morally at least) in the wrong.
hope helpful
December 16th, 2006 at 5:19 pm
Well, the first thing that struck me was how superior Joel’s Ninja is to the coke ad…not only in terms or originality and interest but also in terms of technique.
I guess though, that with a planet’s worth of original ideas on t’Interweb available for plunder by the unscrupulous, we will see more of these goin’s on.
One can only hope that the plunderers will eventually realise that for the infintesial (in corporate terms) amount of money that it would take for them to commision their corporate crap from the original artist (word used after much consideration, and yes - it’s the right word), they will ultimately see the sense in that approach! Sick it to ‘em Joel.
TheFlyingPig
December 16th, 2006 at 6:01 pm
I suggest Joel does something funny involving kittens and the Coke logo, then see how the cunts like people using their intellectual property.
December 17th, 2006 at 12:26 am
Hmm , why do i not feel surprised at another add agency ripping off an idea ?
Bar person, a rum and pepsi in protest . Well perhaps not , pepsi tates worse than the offending brown gack ….. ok just rum !
December 17th, 2006 at 2:49 am
The chords are indeed similar, but very common chords. A more obvious similarity is the triplet rhythm at the end of the phrase…
Except when I listen to either version, what it really reminds me of is Uncle Sam by Madness. That same rhythm is the most noticable thing of the chorus in that song.
Ok, so ska’s always recycling itself, but it might not help Joel’s case…
December 17th, 2006 at 11:07 am
Sweet baby Jesus and the orphans. Coke are thieving bunch of gypsy bastards and no mistake. Register arecokethievinggypsybastards.com and have both videos playing on a loop. Then mail the URL to every website that has a nose for these things and every newspaper you can think of. Coke need a grade A kick up the arse for this.
In all seriousness, you should do something. I’ll bung you a tenner towards your legal fees if you like.
December 17th, 2006 at 9:44 pm
This is a blatant copyright infringement. Contact some Media contract lawyers. Im sure one of them would take the case on, with fee’s recoupable from Damages awarded. I do know a bit about copyright law!!
December 17th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
And drink Irn Bru. Tis a much better fizzy Pop. Made from Girders you know.
December 18th, 2006 at 1:44 am
#294- “I hate to tell you but that idea’s been done before.” - “I know, but it was in England. Nobody’s done it here so it’s not stealing.”
December 18th, 2006 at 5:48 pm
Well, at least they didn’t steal Santa. Oh…wait, yup that was them too
December 19th, 2006 at 4:56 am
can we set them on fucking fire?
December 19th, 2006 at 5:31 am
I’m with Biggus Dickus on this one - go on - Image Challenge it!!!
McDonalds did the same thing to Viz, blatantly ripping off Viz Top Tips, and GOT AWAY WITH IT!
Bastards! (although one of their minions fucked up and gave me two tubs of crinkle fries on Sunday, when I only ordered one, so perhaps they’re not all bad)
Coke’s fucking rancid anyway. Cola is for Cola Cubes and Cola Bottles, fizzy, giant or otherwise. Not for dissolving teeth.
December 19th, 2006 at 5:33 am
By the way, have you seen the teeth on the Santa in the latest Coke advert?
Nope, me neither, I reckon they’re rotten as fuck. Says it all really.
December 19th, 2006 at 11:55 am
The irony here is that the Coca-Cola company probably paid an ad agency far more for this obvious “borrowing” of ideas than they would have if they’d gone to Joel directly.
Legal shenanigans are unlikely to get very far, but a well-worded note to some executive at Coca-Cola could well get some heads rolling, and make them aware that going to an ad agency was probably a big fat waste of money.
December 19th, 2006 at 12:50 pm
Those argies will steal anything….
people’s songs/video ideas
islands
the tango
big hair
The list could go on and on
December 20th, 2006 at 5:09 am
So let’s have a Coke compo and see how quickly they jump on B3tans for copyright infringement!
December 20th, 2006 at 7:05 pm
A coke image challenge will probably end up with b3ta.com becoming a portal of coke.com once the lawsuit needs paying!
However a challenge on cocaine based drinks would be great fun, not to mention sending exactly the right message. (That or soft drink obesity)
December 20th, 2006 at 8:49 pm
At least it was ninjas they stole and not axe wound (hedgehogs) or seepage, both great songs and would suit coca colas image! They have ruined christams by removing the polar bears, the lorry and the holidays are coming song. bastards!
December 21st, 2006 at 9:53 pm
Well done for making this website dedicated to ad-busting.
I’d like to say here and now that all advertising folk are vacuous whores who are too chicken-shit to express their creative talents in the industry that they would all much prefer to be in.
Now that i have totally convinced you that this opinion is un-biased here are my thoughts to anyone who can be bothered to read this far.
1 - the ad is a blatant rip off.
2 - the ad is in the arse end of the world.
3 - if some UK company used it you may have a case.
(I think Masterdard used Joel Veitch stuff a few years ago.)
4 - Ad companies steal stuff from every culture, from each other, from every film and we, as a society, lap it up and let it constantly enter our subconscious and there is very little that can be done about it.
I commend you Rob. You are actually backing your feelings with actions. Unfortunately, there are too many people out there who couldn’t give a toss. You can proabably identify them as they usually say “O I love that advert where the guy….”
We are therefore confined to our snide remarks, satirical commentary, righteous blogs and ineffectual tutting.
Despite my pesimism and with the odd against us, I will stand by you Sir Rob and gladly lay down 20mins of my time to write this drivel.
I will ride with you to the end.
PS: Im not a nutter.
December 22nd, 2006 at 12:15 pm
If one musician can sue another cos 4 notes sounds like something they once recorded in a song 15 years ago surely Joel has a case?
December 23rd, 2006 at 6:34 pm
there was also the small matter of trade unionists in columbian coke factories being assasinated & coke doing nothing about it (i hear the steelworkers union in the states is suing them for corporate killing)… not really connected with them pinching joels stuff though.
i’ve had a feature pinched by a futuristic publisher in the uk, i think i’m complaining about it at least in due course… oh & some daft birds ripped off one of my films recently… grrr… makes my blood boil
December 26th, 2006 at 8:22 am
I’m pretty sure there is grounds on intellectual property rights at least in an “heavily inspired by” way, .. same tune, same method of animation .. they have undoubtedly seen the ninja anim. I could talk to some lawyers and see what they think if you like :0
December 29th, 2006 at 2:42 pm
Could someone post a link to the Virgin mess everyone keeps referring too? I have seemed to miss this episode of debacle.
Thanks!
January 1st, 2007 at 4:28 pm
http://www.virgin.net/music/musicvideos/sparks_dickaround.html
I think the Sparks video for ‘Dick Around’ looks like exactly like Joel’s work.
I looked at rathergood.com to see if he had it featured there as a credited work. But no…
January 1st, 2007 at 8:31 pm
A video of things bouncing up and down backed by a reggae tune. It was hardly a startling work of originality in the first place!
January 3rd, 2007 at 9:44 am
Sky News ran a feature about this today, and they interviewed Joel - he said that the band have taken legal advice and are still looking into the possibility of taking action. They also interviewed a specialist in music copyright law and he said that these things are always very hard to resolve. Then there was a statement from Coca-Cola saying that the situation was ‘regrettable’ but the work was done by a local agency who assured them it was ‘original’.
It’s a shame because I for one think it’s a blatant rip-off. Though, the publicity the band have had as a result can only be a good thing…
January 3rd, 2007 at 7:28 pm
The Sun has also got an article on its website about it as well:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007000344,00.html
January 4th, 2007 at 3:25 am
Just seen that this ripoff by Coke is getting some exposure in Australia now!
http://www.news.com.au had a link to the Sky news piece!
January 4th, 2007 at 9:24 am
http://www.channel4.com/news/content/news-storypage.jsp?id=1359883&intcmp=coke_in_copycat_row
Channel 4 included it on Snowmail last night too.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:31 am
Hmm, now the link to Coke’s website doesn’t work. Excess traffic or have they taken it down deliberately?
January 4th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Hi, I’m boycotting Coke from now on. BTW here’s an offer you can refuse - as a 2nd Dan I could pop round and either encourage them to reach a decent “settlement” with you or take their heads like a victim from a 70’s Fu film. Which would you prefer?
January 4th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Hmmm… B3tards complaining about copyright infringement - reeks of hypocrisy and sour grapes to me.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:53 pm
Yeah but B3tans generally dont get financial gain from their work.. whereas a company that can afford to come up with a wholelly original piece of work has basically ripped verbatim the music and style of rathergood.com’s work.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:30 pm
The story has been on the Sydney Morning Herald website since last night ~ I like that they make mention of Mr Veitch’s “righteous fury followed by deep irritation”. A bottle throwing, can crushing rampage might have been a more appropriate follow on from the righteous fury, but I enjoy that sort of thing with or without copyright issues. Anyhoo, right on ~ and good luck!:
January 5th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
If its any consolation, I saw about this on the news today and went looking for the music. I’d never have noticed it otherwise. At least being blatantly ripped off will result in a great big load of publicity. compensation of sorts?
January 8th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
So who did that really atrocious advert for the Reader’s Digest £250k prize draw with the same old, same old “kitten idea”?
Because, regardless of all the copyright mewling at least Coke have the decency to show this drivel in Argentina and not every ten minutes in the UK.
January 10th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
How about a watchdog special? Do you know which advertising agency coke use? It could be worth having a look at them. And laughing in their faces that they have no originality.
January 21st, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Coke………… an fizzy drink originally made from cocaine…… the second most known phrase worldwide after ok is coca cola………….. they rebranded father christmas for marketing purposes………surprised that they stole someones material? …..have you seen the lame diet coke advert with a tortoise walking around with a can of the fizzy crap glued to its shell………… if thats the best they can come up with i’m not surprised they’ve started to steal other creative geniuses work. Dont drink the rubbish just have the real thing instead….sniff
January 23rd, 2007 at 10:28 am
So Coke settled then eh? Woo, Yay, and very much houpla!
http://media.guardian.co.uk/advertising/story/0,,1996295,00.html
January 23rd, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Just read the latest on the BBC website.
Congratulations to Mr Veitch on the settlement ~ really pleased that the righteous anger paid off and a that couple of charities are going to benefit as well.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6289933.stm
January 23rd, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Similar style but that is it. I would not consider these a copy.
January 23rd, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Looks like you made the frontpage of The Register too.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/23/b3ta_cocacola/
A
January 23rd, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Terrific! Joel V - 1 , Coke - nil. Heheh, so who’s the “Real Thing” now, eh, thieving bastard Coke? Oh, if only I drank the stuff so that I could now boycott it.
But, all in all, more publicity for the original, and some money for the band and for charity. Not bad. 
Never mess with them ninja kittens.
January 24th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
How does Joel license his stuff? Traditional copyright is a bit old hat. A Creative Commons license is one way forward.
http://creativecommons.org/
January 24th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
shameless ad bastards.
January 24th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Well done on the victory Joel. I’m currently facing a similar (if less blatant) situation with some of my own work:
http://www.matt-clark.co.uk/pic.php?o=52
Currently getting legal advice, but it’s depressing how easy it is for people to get away with this stuff.
February 5th, 2007 at 12:02 pm
man that is a coincidence
November 25th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
I’ve never seen this ad here in Argentina.
btw, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3z-qm-Sb_4s