Home > Uncategorized > Olympic Opening Ceremony Debacle goes mainstream media!

Olympic Opening Ceremony Debacle goes mainstream media!

November 20, 2012 Leave a comment Go to comments

Sunday Telegraph 18th November 2012

In the last few days this story has appeared in some mainstream media publications both in print and online. It seems that the snowball launched in August has gathered momentum and has become quite a big story.

A couple of weeks ago a journalist from a press agency (BNPS) based in Bournemouth called me after reading about my concerns in a few arts specific news outlets, Arts Professional and Yorkshire Times.

He interviewed me on the telephone and told me if the story was picked up on he’d let me know. He didn’t though and the Daily Mail ran with the story on Thursday.

Meanwhile a Journalist from the Sunday Telegraph called me and conducted another telephone interview and sent a photographer to my house on Friday.

The BBC called and Peter Levy interviewed me but seemed to get frustrated by his lack of understanding of the situation. He decided not to continue the interview or air it.

The Hull Daily Mail also called and conducted  a brief telephone interview. They subsequently ran the story on Friday complete with the wrong images and out of date irrelevant ones instead.

Today I have noticed that other media outlets are running the story The Sun and Yahoo News and various legal blogs etc….

Its unfortunate that the media running the story seem to be predominantly the right wing ones. Is this because Danny Boyle has leftist leanings or something? Or perhaps because the Olympic Games was largely a Labour Party production?

The most accurate news story from the mainstream media has been the Sunday Telegraph one so far. The most common inaccuracy is the claim that I am suing Danny Boyle. This is not true. I have sought legal advice on the matter and so far have received one legal opinion about where I stand in relation to the law with my claim. Public comments seem to concentrate on the mound itself and rightly point out that I didn’t invent it. I was in fact predominantly inspired by Silbury Hill, I am well aware of many spiral mounds round the world both ancient and modern. The devil, as they say, is in the detail and it is the details that make this a case of ‘copying’, in my opinion. I make no claim to have invented hills or grass or spirals, that would be silly.

Danny Boyle has also been in the news championing regional theatre with colourful language. I have nothing against Danny Boyle. I agree with him about regional funding etc. I enjoyed watching Slumdog Millionaire! However if it is true that the opening ceremonies introduction and set were entirely his vision then I can only conclude that he personally must have seen my work.

It is only a few weeks since I received an email telling me that Danny was entirely responsible for the visual concept of the opening ceremony, before that I didn’t even know who was responsible for it. I imagined that such large projects would include teams of artists and designers all presenting ideas to him and perhaps he would make suggestions and choose his favourites (whilst stroking a white cat and throwing chunks of fish to his pet sharks?).

Despite seemingly being used as a stick to undermine Danny Boyles social concerns (an unforseen and regrettable coincidence) I am pleased that I have managed to kick up an almighty fuss. The only weapon available to those with no money, power or influence.

I hope that goes some way toward explaining how I feel about this story.

The other aspect to the story which is so far missing from all of the above mainstream outlets relates to the competition I entered to begin with, in 2009. The Artists Taking the Lead competition has been placed under some scrutiny by Carol Lee and she seems to have uncovered evidence that the competition itself was corrupted by vested interest and large ccorporate cultural institutions. Now the Arts Council England Yorkshire regional office is conducting an investigation into itself. This is best read about online at the Arts Professional website it has several articles which discuss this issue in detail.

As you can imagine, not only was the competition possibly a foregone conclusion, but also to see mine and Dominics artwork and concept form part of the opening ceremony three years later, left me no option but to stand up for our work.

I didn’t do it lightly. I had to consider the likelihood that I will be laughed at, scorned and probably never get funded for an art project again! But weighing up these potential consequences with my own conscience left me no choice but to act as I have…… to be continued….


Close Up of Sunday Telegraph images

About these ads
  1. November 20, 2012 at 1:09 pm | #1

    Sorry Lee but your ‘concept’ (a hill/mound with a spiral path that an athlete might run up) was not used in the London 2012 Olympic Games opening ceremony at all.

    If you watched the show (it doesn’t sound like you actually did – just that people you know did?), you’d have seen that the Tor, as it was actually called in the show and behind the scenes (as it was meant to represent Glastonbury Tor), did not have a spiral path around it, (the paths were just on the front side and went upwards both to the left and right), did not have anyone ascending it – athlete or otherwise, and had simply a large tree at the top, not a flat clearing.

    Even if the artistic creator, Danny Boyle, had seen your work, which LOCOG deny, he clearly hasn’t ‘copied’ it. What was in the show was not your design.

    Can’t you accept that it’s just a coincidence that there’s just a very loose similarity? It happens.

  2. November 20, 2012 at 1:58 pm | #2

    Can’t help but feel that this feels like sour grapes…and doesn’t paint a pretty picture of you….and that is re-inforced by your second to last paragraph. If you watched the Opening Ceremony, you’d know that the Tor was not a spiral, and the ‘workers’ came down en masse when a tree was uprooted from the top – I see no tree in your image. As you say, the devil is in the detail. Danny Boyle’s concept was the transformation of this green and pleasant land through industrialisation into the modern world…he could hardly tell that story without the green fields to start with. Your reference to which media has picked up the story equally suggests dome sort of delusions…it’s the sensationalist tabloids and the right wing Telegraph that has an axe to grind…perhaps the other media see no merit in your outburst. You may feel hard-done by, and a lawyer may have sniffed some publicity…but really your accusations are baseless and do a great dis-service to yourself. It will be fascinating to see whether you allow critical comments as well as supportive ones

  3. LMS
    November 20, 2012 at 2:27 pm | #3

    Hello Nota and Dave, thanks for your comments, you both concentrate on the hill as do most of the uninformed commenters on the news sites. The hill itself is a small part of the story. I would not have made this public without considering it carefully.Of course I have weighed the possibility of coincidence, zeitgeist and synchronicity. However there are too many features that are exactly the same. I would be most interested to see the preliminary sketches for Danny Boyle’s design though. These would be very enlightening. I will be making a detailed post about the points above and beyond the mound itself very soon. Glastonbury Tor looks nothing like my mound or Danny Boyle’s Tor, it is a barrow shaped mound. They both look more like Silbury hill (and plenty of others). I suggest you study the images more thoroughly. It is not sour grapes or money that inspired my speaking out, but a need to stand up for my and my collaborators work…. By the way I have since watched the opening ceremony of course. It only served to strengthen my conviction that Danny Boyle et al, copied from our sketches. Thanks for your comments though, they are fairly well thought out. But I think you have failed to see what is blatantly obvious. All the best, Lee.

  4. November 20, 2012 at 2:41 pm | #4

    Well actually, Lee, you have failed to demonstrate it. Right now all we can see are vague similarities. You’ve not given us anything else to comment on that is actually relevant to the opening ceremony. Please explain the “too many features that are exactly the same”. As for “a barrow shaped mound”, I’m not sure what you are saying – all barrows are mounds.

    And by the way, the Olympics tor DID look like Glastonbury tor (aside from a tree replacing the monument): http://www.justaxis.biz/glastonbury_tor%5B1%5D.jpg

  5. LMS
    November 20, 2012 at 5:37 pm | #5

    I think, as do many others including lawyers who specialise in IP law, that the similarities are too striking to be merely coincidence.

    The print version of the Sunday Telegraph article shows this clearly. I will be making another post on the matter tonight when I have the time.

    Again I thank you for your opinion. But it is simply that. Your opinion.

    I don’t feel the need to endlessly repeat myself. Suffice to say, I entered an Olympic competition, run by ACE and LOCOG, I presented an extensive proposal, much more than a few cartoon images.

    The postcard image is the most striking in relation to the opening.

    I ask you to contemplate the two images and tell me what similarities you see if any? Then put that in the context of a publicly funded Olympic art competition available to anyone who wished to see it since 2009. The production team for the Olympics were hired in early 2010. Perhaps it may not seem as outlandish a claim as you first suspected?

    Thanks for taking an interest.

  6. LMS
    November 20, 2012 at 11:20 pm | #6

    Dear Dave and Nota, it would seem relevant to add that a cursory glance at both of your websites, interesting as they are, shows that you both worked on the opening ceremony in some capacity. Is it possible that neither of you are being entirely impartial in your assessment of this situation?

    Best wishes, Lee

  7. November 21, 2012 at 5:44 am | #7

    Yes, I was involved, hence having knowledge about it. I wasn’t claiming to be impartial, I just know that what was presented to us as the concept by Danny back in May was not at all related to your work.

    Again, please explain the “too many features that are exactly the same”. Clouds, mounds, cottages and water (it wasn’t actually a pond in the ceremony) feature in all British countryside scenes. I notice that your design doesn’t feature a water wheel, live stock, horse and carts, Brunel, cricket, football and rugby players, ducks, maypoles, mosh pits, cattle lanes and pens, flower beds, a large tree on the mound…

    It seems to me far more likely to be a coincidence that a few elements of your work also featured in the production, than that an Oscar-winning film director would copy your ideas and then showcase them to billions in the world’s biggest live theatrical show, and expect to get away with it.

  8. November 21, 2012 at 10:42 am | #8

    Oh dear, I had thought I would leave one comment and move on…but I can’t. To be clear, being a performer does not make us biased…it does makes us interested and informed. I suspect that as you don’t have the resources to take this to court you will go to your grave a bitter and resentful man, which is a shame. If it did ever get to court, I doubt he case would last more than five minutes. I work in the creative industry and see claims of copying, or passing off, on a regular basis…rarely do they have any merit…and this is one of those cases. You say I concentrated on the mound, indeed I did, but then that is because that is your starting point. Your mound and Danny’s Tor are different in all their aspects and function. It is a shame that as a creative person you have not understood the creative spirit behind Danny Boyle’s vision. There was much symbolism, and the Glastonbury Tor was part of that. The Tor was a representation of Glastonbury Tor – a very spiritual place, and with a global audience, somewhere that the overseas audience could relate to. The other elements you have highlighted…well they’re features of the British countryside, and that is what the opening part of the ceremony was supposed to show…it would have been perverse not to have included them…there are many, many features in Danny’s countryside that are different, not least of which is the road/path which features in your picture…it wasn’t in The Green and Pleasant land, but plays centre stage in yours. Clouds? Well given the wet summer we had, and the predilection for cloudy weather in the UK, why would that not form a part of the set? There was no pond….in fact if I remember rightly, what has been highlighted as a pond was in fact the Poppy Fields where the soldiers stood to mourn our losses The cottage…a basic feature of the British countryside. Not even I would need to take inspiration from elsewhere to include these elements if I had been creating the countryside inside a stadium. Ask anyone what they would include if they were imagining the countryside, I doubt it would differ much if at all.

    My advice would be to put this behind you and move on. If you can’t the future will be a painful place for you. You didn’t win the competition, you were not the inspiration for the opening sequence of Opening Ceremony. You’ve had your day in the spotlight, now is the time to find something else to focus on.

  9. LMS
    November 21, 2012 at 1:30 pm | #9

    Dave, This blog contains all the facts you need, I suggest you read it. Your pride in Danny Boyle and being part of the opening ceremony seems to have got in the way of your powers of observation. I shouldn’t need to do your research for you. I am sure that nothing I can say will cause you to consider that I may be perfectly justified in voicing my concerns. You do not actually know if Danny Boyle or his assistants saw my work or not. I am convinced they must have.

    Nota, your first comment was quite insulting and your second even more so. You clearly didn’t even bother to read the post above because if you had you would note that it was the press who used the word ‘sue’ and not I.

    I stated I have sought legal advice, which is true. Doesn’t sound as exciting as suing and litigatation etc, but that’s not my fault.

    At no time have I felt embittered or even angry about this. In fact I remain in very good humour and indeed I’m busy with several other projects. However I do stand up for myself and my friends when I see an injustice perpetrated.

    You too should read this blog and ask yourself is it even remotely possible that Danny Boyle was influenced by this idea, if your answer is no, then clearly your powers of observation are also suspect.

    Best wishes to you both,


  10. November 21, 2012 at 2:04 pm | #10

    I have not used the word ‘sue’. Legal opinion has no value unless it is tested in court. You’ve found a lawyer that agrees with you, that doesn’t mean others would, let alone a judge or jury. If you sought a legal opinion just to create some noise, that’s a publicity stunt and nothing more. I have a reasonable amount of experience in this area. LOCOG has stated that Danny Boyle didn’t see your work…given the size and structure of LOCOG that seems very likely – but it’s something you’re not prepared to accept. I don’t think it matters what anyone says, you have made your mind up, and will not pay any heed to arguments to the contrary even though I think I provided a pretty detailed rebuttal of your claim….did you actually read my full comment?

  11. November 21, 2012 at 2:19 pm | #11

    “put this behind you and move on” where have I heard that before….

    Mmmm…. LOCOG said DB did not see your work, didn’t ACE say it was accessible to all via their website, so he/they/whomever could quite possibly have seen your work …..who is telling Porkies then :)

  12. November 21, 2012 at 3:12 pm | #12

    Is there anything that would make you accept that Danny Boyle wasn’t inspired by you?

  13. LMS
    November 21, 2012 at 3:25 pm | #13

    You are correct Carol, the art work and large parts of my proposal have been online since 2009, both here on this blog and for a year or two on the ACE website (since deleted).

    The judging panel of the competition I entered had representatives of LOCOG sitting on it.

    Nota, I read your comment, you bring up nothing I haven’t already addressed. You however had clearly not read the thing you were commenting upon.


  14. LMS
    November 21, 2012 at 3:45 pm | #14

    ‘res ipsa loquitur’

  15. November 21, 2012 at 3:51 pm | #15

    Only in your mind, only in your mind…as I asked…is there anything that would make you accept that Danny Boyle wasn’t inspired by you? That’s rhetorical. I’m off to paint a picture of a typical English country scene, complete with hillock

  16. LMS
    November 21, 2012 at 4:01 pm | #16

    Enjoy your painting Nick!

  17. November 21, 2012 at 7:01 pm | #17

    Lee, you have twice said that you will go into more detail, but still haven’t:

    “I will be making a detailed post about the points above and beyond the mound itself very soon.”
    “I will be making another post on the matter tonight when I have the time.”

    That’s all I’m asking for.

    “Is it even remotely possible that Danny Boyle was influenced by this idea” – yes, very remotely. Is it likely? No, for the many many reasons I’ve stated above.

    And please do tell us, is there anything that would make you accept that Danny Boyle wasn’t inspired by you?

  18. LMS
    November 21, 2012 at 10:32 pm | #18

    Dave, I pointed out that most of the evidence I have is on this blog. I suggest you read it. I can’t say fairer than that. I am not here just to answer your questions. I would only be repeating myself. I have an analytical break down of the parallels, but it would seem prudent at this point in time not to publish that to all and sundry. I can tell you that lawyers have seen it as did the Sunday Telegraph. Do you really think all these outlets would report this if it was as unlikely as you claim? They are reporting it because it looks very suspicious indeed.

    I did consider posting another breakdown of the case especially for you Dave, but then decided better of it because in actual fact you don’t really care. You are simply here to try and make me look ridiculous. How could an ‘Oscar winning director’ be inspired by a mere mortal such as I? etc …..

    I can say this kind of thing occurs all the time. Plaudits do not make the man. I have presented my story in good faith. You and Nick / Nota are trying to bait me with your comments. You won’t get a bite here I’m sorry.

  19. November 22, 2012 at 9:15 am | #19

    I’ve already looked through your blog and can’t find the evidence you refer to, hence asking you to explain.

    It would be prudent not to justify your claim? How so?

    Yes, I do think outlets will be quite happy to report that you are claiming your work was copied, as that puts the responsibility on you, not them, but gives them something to report. And if you know anything about British/worldwide media these days, it’s that once one outlet reports something, others all jump on the bandwagon to try to sell more papers, get more viewers or listeners, or receive more clicks.

    Of course I care. If you can demonstrate what makes you so sure/so suspicious, and it seems plausible, I’ll side with you, as obviously I cannot possibly know that Danny Boyle never saw your work. But right now, as I’ve explained, it really does not. Again, please do tell us, is there anything that would make you accept that he wasn’t inspired by you?

    By the way, I never asked ‘how’ an Oscar-winning film director could be inspired by you, but simply ‘why’ he would copy you, knowing that his work will be seen by billions, including yourself!

    We’re not trying to bait you into anything, except to actually present your case in full.

  20. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 2:04 pm | #20

    Hello again Dave,

    Firstly this is not a court of law and this case is unlikely to come to court for several reasons. However there is the possibility that Danny Boyle may decide to take legal action himself. After all the accusation does not look good for him. If that should happen then I need to be able to defend my claim. That is why it is prudent to keep some things to myself at this stage. But I repeat, most of the evidence is here on this site, as it has been since 2009. Just before Danny et al got the job.

    In early 2010 anybody searching on google for london olympic related site’s would have found this one. It ranked very high in their search results. The term ‘spiral mound’ still brings this site up as the number one search result.

    Do you think Danny Boyle may have done some research online whilst trying to come up with the opening ceremony plan?

    It seems very likely to me. It also seems very likely that he would have seen this very blog.

    You worked on the opening ceremony in some capacity, maybe you still work for them in some capacity, I don’t know.

    The fact you state you can see no relation or evidence on this site suggests to me you are not taking it seriously. The similarities are very obvious to most people.

    One other point, the Sunday Telegraph were very thorough and careful about reporting this. Their article is accurate. The journalist herself was gobsmacked when she saw the images, as was the Telegraph picture editor, as were the lawyers, as were the editors of Arts Professional, the Arts Newspaper, the Yorkshire Times, the Mail etc… What do they all see that you can’t I wonder?

  21. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 7:42 pm | #21

    I will add something that may be of interest to you. It concerns google searches that have brought people to this site. I have a record of them going back to the blog’s inception. Some of them are quite specialised.

    For example:
    “construction of a spiral mound”
    “artifficial hill”
    “the prime meridian in greenwich”
    “greenwhich longitude”
    “london olympic legacy plan”
    “mound builders and trees”
    “olympic legacy”
    “ancient mounds”
    “landscape mound construction”
    “meadows landscape site plan sketches”
    “outdoor theatre sketches”
    “sketch outdoor theatre”
    “prime meridian”
    “glastonbury tor sacred landscape”
    “build an outdoor theater”
    “prime meridian at greenwich”
    “olympic park 2012″
    “landscaping large mounds”
    “land art artificial hills”
    “greenwich 0 degrees”
    “landscape plan sketch”
    “outside theater landscape plan”
    “ancient olympic games”
    “olympic 2012″
    “olympic games 2012″
    “0 degrees longitude”
    “outdoor theatre”
    “prime meridian”.

    There are 100′s more. Some are popular terms like ‘prime meridian’ this has brought over 200 people to this site. As I said some are more specialised. Did you notice that the ‘Tor’ in the opening ceremony was situated on 0 degree longitude? And that I had proposed placing mine on 0 degree longitude in Yorkshire?

  22. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 8:09 pm | #22

    There are coincidences, and there are other things, like google.

  23. November 22, 2012 at 8:13 pm | #23

    So you instead of posting your defence now, you would prefer to be potentially sued for libel and at that point then reveal it? That seems an expensive and time-consuming way to do things. If you are so sure your claims are true, by simply explaining how, you would avoid any risk of that happening, because they are the truth, right?

    Why would anyone be searching for “spiral mound”, sorry?

    Do I think Danny is likely to have researched his ideas? Sure. Would he have come across this site amongst the millions that exist? Unlikely. But in any case, unless you have proof, your claim is worthless.

    No, I am not taking it seriously because the few things that both ideas happen to have in common, could easily have been thought of independently. FYI, I’v not been in contact with Danny since before the performance.

    I’d love them and you to explain what you see that I cannot. So far, the only things that I have seen in common are a hill, a cottage and some clouds – things that would feature in any pastoral scene. I have already described many many more other parts that the designs do not have in common, so to say that one is a copy of another seems ridiculous, to me.

    Actually, the grid co-ordinates of the north end of the Olympic Stadium (which is where the tor had to be, as the south end has a vomitorium that was needed for the ceremony) are 51.539585,-0.016243 – not 0 degrees – and in any case the site for the park and stadium was decided on before the London 2012 bid was even accepted back in 2005, four years before you published your design.

  24. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 8:25 pm | #24

    You reveal yourself in this post Dave, sorry to say. You don’t even find it remotely interesting that someone searching for some of those terms came to this site? You pick the easiest one to critique “spiral mound” as you say it wasn’t one then quibble over O degree longitude. I found very quickly that the site of the stadium was 0 degree longitude in 2009 when I did my research. 0.01 is pretty much on the button.

    No more titbits for you.

    So far official denials from Danny Boyle have been through LOCOG, they are very weak denials. Don’t you even think they might be worth questioning? I have answered several of your questions, and its bugger all to do with you, but I have been polite.

    Nobody has answered mine.

    If I was Danny Boyle and had heard these accusations I would want to clear the matter up. I might even, being rich enough, threaten the person making these false claims with legal action.

    This has not happened.

    Perhaps it will. We shall see.

  25. November 22, 2012 at 8:26 pm | #25

    Also, I just noticed that Sunday Telegraph seems to think both ideas had someone carrying the Olympic torch to the top of the hill/mound, yet nothing like this happened in the ceremony?!

    Nor is there a lake or a pond (in the ceremony it was a babbling brook, with actual running water [not stagnant, like in a lake or pond]), hence the water wheel which was there to show how, at the start of the industrial revolution, water power was utilised.

  26. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 8:29 pm | #26

    The area that is a lake in our picture, looks like a ploughed field or some such thing in the ceremony. It is almost exactly the same shape and in the same place as ours. The water feature being moved to the other side. Also in response to an earlier critique, there are cows and sheep in our sketches too (which I thought a very minor detail anyway).

  27. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 8:31 pm | #27

    How many coincidences do you need before its no longer coincidence Dave?

  28. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 8:35 pm | #28

    “glastonbury tor sacred landscape” “meadows landscape site plan sketches” “mound builders and trees” “ancient mounds”

  29. November 22, 2012 at 9:08 pm | #29

    “You don’t even find it remotely interesting that someone searching for some of those terms came to this site?” – no, not really, when there are at least a billion people with Internet access.

    No, sorry, -0.016 is not “on the button”. The zero degree line is a kilometre to the east of the north end of the stadium, outside the Olympic Park… which in any case is just a coincidence (that it is near the park and stadium) as the site was decided before 2005! I’m not quibbling, I’m demonstrating that you’re clutching at something which firstly isn’t actually true, and secondly even if it were true could not have been copied from you, unless LOCOG have some kind of time machine that lets them jump 5 years into the future.

    Which questions of yours have not been answered, sorry?

    For the last time, there was nothing about the ceremony that involved a spiral, especially not the Tor. So please forgive me for having to remind you of this as you don’t seem to accept it.

    Bugger all to do with me? Well, I performed in the ceremony, I spent many days rehearsing on the ‘green and pleasant land’ (taken from the poem Jerusalem, not your ideas), so I’m a lot more familiar with it than you, than the journalists and lawyers you’ve spoken to, and the general public who have commented on your plight. It’s a shame that you ignore the facts I am telling you.

  30. November 22, 2012 at 9:10 pm | #30

    I need a lot more than three vague coincidences (the presence of a hill, the presence of a cottage, and the presence of some clouds) amongst thousands of details, and so does the law.

  31. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 9:19 pm | #31

    Out of the Billion people with internet access how many do you think are considering mounting a large theatrical event with an English landscape including large mound, in 2012, on 0 degree longitude?

    There are more than three strong similarities in the one image alone. You are not trying. You also place way too much faith in coincidence. You play this down by saying the similarities are vague. This is either a lie on your part or you can not use your eyes properly. Most others who have seen the images are shocked. How can that be if the similarities are vaguely coincidental?

    Keep trying Dave!

    I hope Danny is paying you by the word.

  32. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 9:20 pm | #32

    Also bringing up law and judges etc does not phase me one iota. You are wasting your breath. I am prepared to face any consequences of telling the truth.

  33. November 22, 2012 at 9:30 pm | #33

    “Out of the Billion people with internet access how many do you think are considering mounting a large theatrical event with an English landscape including large mound, in 2012, on 0 degree longitude?”

    None. The stadium is not on zero degrees longitude.

    “There are more than three strong similarities in the one image alone.” – please explain them!

    The similarities ARE vague. Any kind of pastoral scene would feature a hill, a cottage and some clouds.

    “Most others who have seen the images are shocked. How can that be if the similarities are vaguely coincidental?”

    Because “most others” pay little attention to detail, and are easily led. There are at least 100 individual features within Danny’s design, and at least as many in yours. Three of them are vaguely similar. That’s it. Sensible people call this a coincidence.

  34. November 22, 2012 at 9:31 pm | #34

    Just to be clear, are you or are you not claiming copyright has been infringed?

  35. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 9:32 pm | #35

    Ha ha ha!

  36. November 22, 2012 at 9:58 pm | #36

    “There are more than three strong similarities in the one image alone.” – please explain them!

    Just to be clear, are you or are you not claiming copyright has been infringed? If you are, that is why I’m bringing up the law. If not, you should really just stop making yourself look stupid.

    As for telling the truth, if you are claiming that you copyright has been infringed, but have no evidence, then you are not “telling the truth”, you are libelling.

  37. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 10:04 pm | #37

    If I am sued for libel and found guilty then you can consider yourself correct Dave. Until that time you are not. I won’t be discussing anymore ‘quibbles’ with you though.


  38. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 10:16 pm | #38

    “Lived at the foot of Glastonbury Tor for years, it is not that shape and it has the tower of a ruined church ,St Michaels, at the top not a tree. But I suppose a church tower would have offended some people. Boyles is really nothing like our Glastonbury Tor – Michael Cooper”

  39. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 10:16 pm | #39

    “It’s his intellectual property, AND there’s a ton of proof of that. The only thing difficult to prove is whether or not Boyle caught so much as a glimpse of the original artwork – which is why this publicity might help, someone might have shown Boyle some of these postcards or something else with the idea on it, and they might chip in for their pound of flesh. – Kazz”

  40. November 22, 2012 at 10:50 pm | #40

    “Boyles is really nothing like our Glastonbury Tor” – apart from the fact that they both large grassy mounds, which apparently is all it takes for you to claim plagiarism.

    However, both the Tor in the ceremony and Glastonbury Tor have focal points on top of them, whereas your spiral mound does not.

    You still haven’t answered my questions. I wonder why…

  41. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 10:53 pm | #41

    “Initially i thought B***S*#$%$ just a coincidence, & even liked Russell’s comment below. Then i followed the link in the article & read his blog, & compared the pictures etc. Then i followed the ‘Arts Professional’ link in his blog, then i done little bit of googling……. & now i’m convinced this guy genuinely had his idea & design ripped off!. – Old”

  42. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 10:54 pm | #42

    “The coincidence is too obvious to dismiss. I am an artist and it is virtually impossible to come up with a design so similar as this one for the same event. Of course Boyle was influenced by it – but he has not actually plagerised the design, he has used his own version. It is though – suspicious! but very very hard to prove. NOT WORTH THE FUSS! – Gilchap”

  43. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 10:55 pm | #43

    “Given how ‘left field’ Boyle’s idea was; it is remarkable that a similar idea was put forward to THE GAMES before Boyle’s plans went firm. We can take it for granted that two artists have exactly the same (leftfield) idea for such an event or otherwise think, do you know what the chances of that are pretty remote…. – Standby”

  44. November 22, 2012 at 11:11 pm | #44

    “it is virtually impossible” – which actually means, it is possible.

    “NOT WORTH THE FUSS!” – I entirely agree.

    “We can take it for granted that two artists have exactly the same (leftfield) idea for such an event or otherwise” – no, they’re not exactly the same, not by a long shot, nor are they even for the same event! You didn’t enter a “mastermind the London 2012 Olympics opening ceremony” competition, did you?

  45. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 11:15 pm | #45

    “Anyone who can’t see that’s a rip off must be blind or stupid. – Ninefingers”

  46. November 22, 2012 at 11:32 pm | #46

    Anyone who calls themselves “Ninefingers”, can’t be taken seriously.

  47. LMS
    November 22, 2012 at 11:38 pm | #47

    Nope, only you should be taken seriously.

  48. November 23, 2012 at 12:15 am | #48

    At least I am capable of answering questions.

    “There are more than three strong similarities in the one image alone.” – please explain them!

    Just to be clear, are you or are you not claiming copyright has been infringed? If you are, that is why I’m bringing up the law. If not, you should really just stop making yourself look stupid.

  49. LMS
    November 23, 2012 at 12:27 am | #49

    Well you mentioned four!

  50. November 23, 2012 at 12:13 pm | #50

    IP lawyers say there are too many similarities to be coincidence and Danny Boyle had access. The burden of proof in civil cases is ‘on balance of probabilities’ not ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. I think there’s definitely a case and it isn’t fanciful but it’ll never be brought because the artist isn’t wealthy. There’s no small-claims route either, so basically no justice available for the common man. It’s not for anyone to say whether that has been infringement even if there was access but you can discuss it all you like. Only a court can decide!

  51. LMS
    November 23, 2012 at 2:57 pm | #51

    I agree Kristian, thanks for your comment!

  52. LMS
    November 23, 2012 at 4:56 pm | #52

    “From one artist to another, please continue with your claim and I hope on behalf of all artists you win your righteous claim. Too many people rip off the artists ideas every day and get away with it. Specially if they are known and have a good law firm on their side. Its time for it to stop. I was ripped off by the BHA and Football Association for my work in 2004 European Football championship. Sad world we living in. Where the rich can steal and get away with it with a golden handshake and endless praises but the poor be locked up. – Kouri”

  53. LMS
    November 23, 2012 at 5:11 pm | #53

    “He didn’t invent the mound but he did invent his depiction of it and this composition is uncannily similar to Boyles scene – I really don’t think this is a coincidence! These drawings easily could fit as sketches for what Danny Boyle produced. Though I totally agree that everyone ‘takes inspiration’ (shall we call it) from others, it looks to me like this man should be credited… as Mr.Boyle was sure hailed for his ‘creation’! – Daphne Doo”

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: