This is the logo for MGM Grand.
And this is a vector lion available for £29 from Shutterstock.
Curious.
Via Creative Group.
Similar: Buy the iconic WWF panda for $69
Update:
Having just been threatened with legal action for the sale of the MGM Grand lion, and as the vector graphic in question has since been removed from Shutterstock, I think it’s safe to say who was in the wrong. If ever there was a reason not to use stock graphics in logos (or anywhere else?), this is it.
Posted . Updated .
Learn how enduring logos are made in Logo Design Love, third edition.
Justin,
Which came first, the lion or the lion?
Jonathan Patterson,
Somebody’s gonna get their pants sued off.
Jerry Kuyper,
At a quick glance I saw one small line had been removed from the original.
Perhaps this is the conscious of the rip off industry speaking.
“We will no longer make logos distinctly worse (WWF Panda) before we resell them. We will maintain the integrity of the original design.”
Stijn,
And it’s not even a good copy.
Jerry Kuyper,
I meant conscience not conscious.
Note to self: drink coffee first – then post
Stijn, good point on quality of copy. I love the addition of the Shutterstock logo on the lion copy – is that to keep MGM Grand from stealing the logo back?
Jeff Kahn,
this knock off will be removed soon… thanks to this post.
Christina,
This is frightening. My husband could do this. He’s a scientist.
David,
Really – it would help if someone would clarify which is the culprit. The idiot who used a piece of stock for the logo. Or the idiot who copied the logo for his piece of stock.
Dylan,
Step 1) Pirate copy of Adobe Illustrator
Step 2) Find logo to pirate > Right click > save.
Step 3) Open Illustrator > Place image on art board
Step 4) Click live trace > click expand > copy paths > save as “my design”
Step 5) Sell design/crowd source/contests > rake in cash > call yourself a “Professional Graphic Designer”
Step 6) Hire lawyer/disappear
Michael Campbell,
How do these “designers” sleep at night?
Casey,
I clicked the link to the lion symbol and it’s been taken down.
Running scared or ducking for cover.
April,
…and here’s a lawsuit for using the MGM Grand lion, for much more than it would have been to hire a graphic designer to design you a logo!
Joe,
An absolutely incredible feat of nothing… there must be some kind of witty Zen quote for this somewhere?
Tino Cordes,
Looks like the MGM logo has a little more quality in the form and the lines. My guess is that the stock logo is the copy.
Denis,
Shutterstock already removed the file :)))))
Rajesh Pancholi,
Oh dear me ……
Matt Hollands,
The lion looks a little worried to me! Possible about impending lawsuit.
Kevin Burr,
I’m surprised big stock companies like this haven’t hired someone to lookout for these rips before the art actually gets added to their site.
Dylan,
I’m sure there is complex verbiage somewhere in the upload process that gives some sort of indemnity to these sites that “broker” stolen images so they either cannot or less likely to be sued. You cannot cover all the bases, but it makes it harder to go after them.
That $99.00 logo can wind up costing thousands of times the original cost and makes hiring a Pro designer look much cheaper.
Anzor,
loool .. i wish he didn’t retouch the ear .. it looked better on the vector art
Theo,
I am with Kevin Burr on this one, stock companies should check for plagiarism and close the “artist’s” account.
adam,
I have some gritty, detailed experience with that logo. It is not a very clean vector. Maybe the shutterstock user just cleaned it up a little and offered the cleaner version for sale. It’s a lot cheaper than some designers would have charged to clean errant nodes.
The VMCA,
Hmm, but which came first, the chicken or the egg…either way…ouch.
Jon,
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this at best borderline of copyright infringement? Still a little shady in this area :p
Chris Clowes,
Well, I don’t know which came first but I suspect the MGM version did, so it’s a simple, straightforward theft. The very few, very minor alterations are no where near enough to avoid a blatant copyright infringement suit. Lawyer up guys! Some people’s balls are bigger than their brains eh? If on the other hand MGMs logo uses a $29 Shutterstock image I’d love to know A: how much they paid their designers for the logo and B: how they can TM it…..?
Amanda,
GASP! Utterly shameless! :O LOL
*tweet*
Simon C Page,
It’s worrying how many innocent people have used this thinking it is fine and how many others are there on Shutterstock like this?
David Airey,
Having just been threatened with legal action for the sale of the MGM Grand lion, and as the vector graphic in question has since been removed from Shutterstock, I think it’s safe to say who was in the wrong. If ever there was a reason not to use stock graphics in logos (or anywhere else?), this is it.
Dorothy,
tsk! tsk! tsk!
BTW: Some of these comments (especially Dylan’s first comment) pretty much sums it up…!
Dorothy,
Hear! Hear! @David
Krist,
And to think Shutterstock has turned down plenty of my images
David,
@David – I’m pretty sure it’s against the licensing agreement to use stock from Shutterstock or iStock as the main element of a logo. Though I can’t throw any stones in that direction. But something as high profile as this shows just a tiny lapse of judgement.
Stewart,
Yep, no one saw this coming did they ;-)
Jerome Collinge,
The designer should hang their head in shame to put out this type of work and actually pass it off as their own.
Clazi,
Joe: You wrote,
“An absolutely incredible feat of nothing… there must be some kind of witty Zen quote for this somewhere?” How about “Trampling Feat Faces Defeat?”
Alex Campbell-Hart,
Do Shutterstock do much vetting of the vector images uploaded on their site prior to selling them?