Sony has recently unveiled a ridiculous new ad campaign called "Play Face," which revolves around showing videos and pictures of the stupid faces people pull while playing PS3 games. However, the campaign will be familiar to anybody who knows the work of artist Phil Toledano, who took his own game face photographs in 2006. He doesn't sound too happy about the similarities, either.
"It pretty much looks like they happily ripped me off..." was Toledano's curt reply.
The "Play Face" campaign features some celebrities, and Sony plans to upload photos of Tokyo and Osaka gamersm to the official Web site, where users can vote for their favorite ones.
What do you think? Did Sony happily rip this artist off, or is this an honest coincidence? I'm veering toward coincidence myself since photographs of faces aren't exactly anything new, but I wouldn't put anything above one of these companies.
Hit the jump for a video of this stupid, stupid campaign.
Jim Sterling serves as reviews editor for Destructoid.com, head of the Podtoid podcast, and produces a number of news stories, original features, one-of-a-kind videos. With his passionate argumentative style, controversial opinions, harsh delivery, and dedication to brutal honesty Sterling is a name that you can't help but recognize.
Likes
PS2, iPod Touch, Silent Hill 2, Metal Gear Solid, Dynasty Warriors 3
Meet the rest of the team
Wow, that shit is dumb. Alternating fast and slow mo clips of people making stupid faces at a non-existent television screen set to equally stupid stock noises that aren't actually in any games. MARKETING AT WORK
Me and my friends did this once years ago playign Toy Commander on the Dreamcast for sh*ts and giggles. This isn't anything new - it was old when Toledano did it.
Artists sometimes think too much of themselves. That dude probably hasn't copyrighted the idea, so Sony has every right to do his. Besides, who is he to think that he is so good at what he does that even Sony would want to steal the idea? He honestly needs to STFU, as he isn't the first do do that (Probably).
Wow, guys, we live in the days where Sony rips off everything possible. Sony is unoriginal, we all know that. So we shouldn't be surprised when they make a stupid move or copy something.
@h5e5I5I5o5 (what the hell is that name of yours?)
Let me proofread your post for you:
Wow, guys, we live in the days where every company in any industry anywhere rips off everything possible. Every company in any industry anywhere is unoriginal, we all know that. So we shouldn't be surprised when they make a stupid move or copy something.
If anything, I would say that it was a ripoff of the videos that were made of kids playing video games, just with more "style" and adults. Hopefully this link works... I'm at work and can't see the video:
Yes they ripped him off. If you think the creative director has never seen the original, you're being willfully naive. That's what ad companies do. They rip off other creative artists to sell shit. "Honest coincidnece"? Nothing about the advertising industry has ever been honest or coincidental.
Yea I think I remember seeing his photos published in Communication Arts. Looks like Sony stole the idea and found a way to make it disturbing and irrelevant.
Uhm aren't commercials almost always fucking dumb? That's like the number one rule for marketing. I don't think any really good commercial ever made me buy something. Although I know for a fact that stupid commercials did.
Ha ha the fuzzballs and the "black" squirrels. I remember those.
And the creepy baby and just weird PS3 ads!
Seriously, get a new advertising department. I know nobody else is doing it well either (the Wii people are disturbing, and I have no idea if the Xbox ones even have like a theme or whatever).
You guys do realize that this is a SCE JAPAN commercial and all those advertising abominations were made by SCE AMERICA, right? SCEJ can't exactly fire nimwits that they didn't hire, you know.
There's a fair amount of creative license in producing
art and laying claim to plagarism. If I were to paint a red square and call it my own piece, would I have to worry about any other artist that paints a red square?
It's all about interpretation of the ad vs the art. The ad is trying to convey a range of emotions and reactions from each person in the ad. The photo set show a single reaction from each person. Those are stucturally similar but still different when seen as a whole.
The artist can complain all he wants but given the obtuse and non-unique nature of his work, (honestly his people could be doing anything non-gaming related...) Sony make it their own work by showing a controller to help define the piece.
Yes, because making faces at a camera is such an original idea.
Why can't Sony just make some ads showing off gameplay? You know, something that people who play video games actually care about. But no they'd rather waste their advertising funds on annoying garbage.
Who knew thay Destructoid had so many copyright lawyers reading their web site?
Anyway, since there are so many copyright law experts here, could you guys help me with my case? You see, I had the idea in 2002 that people could make comments about virtually anything without having the slightest bit of knowledge in that particular field, yet would comment as if they had even the slightest clue as to what they are talking about. So clearly, this idea is mine and anyone who makes comments like that are stealing from me.
Also, Sony is clearly the only company in the history of mankind that has ever taken an idea and exploited and/or expanded upon it. Sony sucks.
Oh, and I also had an idea that people could use sarcasm. Its my idea, and anyone who uses sarcasm will be hearing from my team of legal experts who read and comment on stories posted here on Destructoid.com
Also, Sony sucks.
This ad sucks so much, Sony's ads for the past decade have sucked. They need to go back to their 90's campaigns, the fact that I can remember them shows how effective they were.
Whatchu talkin' bout? I loved the PSP's quirky and odd commercials. Sony did something right there, imo. This is just odd. And if I ever see someone making these faces while playing a game, I'll like to know what the hell they're playing. I do have to say, on the last version, I like the first guy's sense of style. It's different. Different is good.
First of all it's an Asian market trailer. Their standards for creating & executing advertising, so what we perceive as "stupid" may very well be "clever" for them. Secondly, I actually give them credit for this: think about it. This commercial is getting viewers there to say "what's causing people to make these extreme faces?" in advertising, the idea of "less is more" will always exist.
Finally, I won't pretend to know too much about copyright law (even though I have researched it on many occasions being an arist myself), but unless the photographer filed a copyright on faces, he doesn't much of a leg to stand on.
I however have a patent on facial musculature; so unless everyone stays deadpan, you--yes you reader--owe me a nickel every time you make a face.
You now owe me 5 cents for that reaction right now.
Who is the girl with the denim vest and blue contact lenses? She is gorgeous! Is she a singer, or an actress? Obviously one or the other. I hope that someone knows, or can read the text on the screen beneath her face.
That's a horrible argument. Different styles, techniques, poses, settings, etc... can all keep art from being plagiarism.
This ad campaign is so shitty. Not only is the concept shitty, but it looks faked...or at the very least, it looks like the "actors" were asked to ham it up big time. Fuck that.
This is shyte! While the commercial is one of the worst i've ever seen (show me the games, muthafokkers) the idea that photographing (or filming) close-ups of people playing video-games is a rip-off of that Toledano guy is bullshit.
Suck on a big fat cock, Toledano!
"Happily ripped me off...", i'll happily rip off your anus you cunt.
Wait a sec... A copyright on faces of peoples reactions to video games.
Shit! Someone should get a patent on faces and they'd make a fortune from every wedding afterwards since those are all shots of people and faces.
The only real joke here is the DMCA! The Digital Millenium Copyright Act which thanks to enough funds from lobbyists to buy a small country got passed in Congress this insane and stupid law.
Copyright law has gone to new heights of absurdity. Now you can own the copyright until 75 years after the artists death! Good thing Disney had all those stories they use for their cartoons written before copyright law was invented.
I bet Hans Christian Anderson would be getting serious royalties if he were alive right now.
Just wait until Mickey-Fucking-Mouse goes public domain! That will be priceless!
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
12:40 PM on 08.20.2009
| 
Let me proofread your post for you:
Wow, guys, we live in the days where every company in any industry anywhere rips off everything possible. Every company in any industry anywhere is unoriginal, we all know that. So we shouldn't be surprised when they make a stupid move or copy something.
Robbie Cooper: Immersion
Small little overly-racist Latino fuzzballs talking about the PSP?
Yea they need to fire that whole department.
At least that commercial was funny.
And the creepy baby and just weird PS3 ads!
Seriously, get a new advertising department. I know nobody else is doing it well either (the Wii people are disturbing, and I have no idea if the Xbox ones even have like a theme or whatever).
To be fair there is this fucking awesome commercial by Arby's out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssukzKa5P0w
You guys do realize that this is a SCE JAPAN commercial and all those advertising abominations were made by SCE AMERICA, right? SCEJ can't exactly fire nimwits that they didn't hire, you know.
2) Capturing reaction shots is nothing new
3) Shut up Jim.
art and laying claim to plagarism. If I were to paint a red square and call it my own piece, would I have to worry about any other artist that paints a red square?
It's all about interpretation of the ad vs the art. The ad is trying to convey a range of emotions and reactions from each person in the ad. The photo set show a single reaction from each person. Those are stucturally similar but still different when seen as a whole.
The artist can complain all he wants but given the obtuse and non-unique nature of his work, (honestly his people could be doing anything non-gaming related...) Sony make it their own work by showing a controller to help define the piece.
Why can't Sony just make some ads showing off gameplay? You know, something that people who play video games actually care about. But no they'd rather waste their advertising funds on annoying garbage.
Anyway, since there are so many copyright law experts here, could you guys help me with my case? You see, I had the idea in 2002 that people could make comments about virtually anything without having the slightest bit of knowledge in that particular field, yet would comment as if they had even the slightest clue as to what they are talking about. So clearly, this idea is mine and anyone who makes comments like that are stealing from me.
Also, Sony is clearly the only company in the history of mankind that has ever taken an idea and exploited and/or expanded upon it. Sony sucks.
Oh, and I also had an idea that people could use sarcasm. Its my idea, and anyone who uses sarcasm will be hearing from my team of legal experts who read and comment on stories posted here on Destructoid.com
Also, Sony sucks.
Fire them all.
Fire everybody then! Wait...
Well good to know PS commercials are weird on both sides of the pacific.
Which is a PSP, and how it's all I want for Christmas.
Finally, I won't pretend to know too much about copyright law (even though I have researched it on many occasions being an arist myself), but unless the photographer filed a copyright on faces, he doesn't much of a leg to stand on.
I however have a patent on facial musculature; so unless everyone stays deadpan, you--yes you reader--owe me a nickel every time you make a face.
You now owe me 5 cents for that reaction right now.
wtf?
This ad campaign is so shitty. Not only is the concept shitty, but it looks faked...or at the very least, it looks like the "actors" were asked to ham it up big time. Fuck that.
And oh noes. The second gamer in the commercial made elephant sounds.
Suck on a big fat cock, Toledano!
"Happily ripped me off...", i'll happily rip off your anus you cunt.
Shit! Someone should get a patent on faces and they'd make a fortune from every wedding afterwards since those are all shots of people and faces.
The only real joke here is the DMCA! The Digital Millenium Copyright Act which thanks to enough funds from lobbyists to buy a small country got passed in Congress this insane and stupid law.
Copyright law has gone to new heights of absurdity. Now you can own the copyright until 75 years after the artists death! Good thing Disney had all those stories they use for their cartoons written before copyright law was invented.
I bet Hans Christian Anderson would be getting serious royalties if he were alive right now.
Just wait until Mickey-Fucking-Mouse goes public domain! That will be priceless!
Why is nobody comparing that to the 360 lobotomised people adverts... pretty sure they did it to show off the reactions people were having with games.