Cody Foster and Co PR semantics

In case you haven't seen it, Cody Foster and Co. released a statement about their business model. Keep in mind this statement was released November 5, 2013. Also note: There are sentences omitted, ones which I feel are inappropriate and blame-shifting, as well as not on topic to this post. All emphasis below is my own.
Cody Foster and Co. acknowledges that a small number of products in our catalog of more than 1800 items bear strong similarities to ones being sold by others. When this issue first came to our attention in mid-October {1}, we immediately pulled those products from our catalog and offered refunds to any of our customers that asked for them {2}.
We deeply regret any harm we may have inadvertently caused to our customers and the artist community at large. We are instituting new processes and procedures to reduce the likelihood that this happens again.
Our explanation for how this happened is simple, though not excusable. Unfortunately it occurs regularly in this industry. Documenting “artistic inspiration” {3} for reproduced craft products – particularly for those based on folk designs – is a difficult process and presents a huge challenge for suppliers, artists and retailers alike.
Cody Foster and Co. is a small, privately owned business with 18 employees located in central Nebraska. We greatly value original design and artistic creation and we are committed to properly compensating individuals who clearly create unique designs that delight and inspire {4}. Even before this incident, we have been exploring new ways to engage with artists through commissioning designs and providing royalty agreements based on sales. We know that more needs to be done to protect artists and we look forward to doing our part to ensure a fair environment for everyone involved.
{1} Let's visit a blog which posted this statement October 03, 2009:
About a month ago it was brought to my attention that this specific xxxxxxxx (sold in 2007 and pictured above left) is being mass produced by a US based company and sold through their holiday catalog, wholesale and very very cheap (pictured above right)...
Now I am finding myself working with a lawyer for the first time, and spending hours and hours researching this company, snooping on the internet, and dwelling over what the release of these knock offs may do to my holiday business. 

Just to beat a dead horse, here's a response to a Cease and Desist letter from Henderson Dry Goods in November 2012:

An amicable enough letter, though one that overlooks any previous damage that may have been done to the artist's livelihood.  The solution to the first instance is unknown, while the solution to the second is, as expected, free of responsibility. Two examples which further prove 2013 wasn't the first time Cody Foster and Co. had a little trouble.

{2} They offer a similar hands-off approach to resolving issues with resellers. This approach only works if the businesses have read the recent CFandC public statement and leaves the rest with a shop full of wares they may be uncomfortable selling.

{3} We can guess their inspiration sources, though theoretically applying the term "folk" could obscure any reference to originality. Thank you Cody Foster and Co for the world's shortest PHIL101: Intro to Postmodernism. *second shortest here

At this point, if you haven't read it, I'd like to direct you to John Brownlee's acute observations of the Cody Foster statement.

{4} As for proper compensation, I will direct you to the response House of Moss received from Cody Foster and Co. November 1, 2013:

Thank you very much for your recent email and for bringing your concern to our attention. Due to the similarities and out of an abundance of precaution we will cease and desist as per your request. Or if you prefer we would be happy to discuss a royalty or licensing agreement. Again, we are very sorry for any inconvenience you have been caused and hope to work with you moving forward.

Which states they'll stop producing the item. It does not indicate if they will no longer sell the items produced, and does not offer compensation for previous sales.

All that said, what do you think? Was it all a big, messy coincidence?

No comments: