Jump to content

Which came 1st the D-Back or the Lipstick!?!


mapleafan

Recommended Posts

So I was out shopping w/ my wife and we were in Sephora when I noticed a Logo. And I wondered since when did the D-Backs make makeup. But no it was a guy named Vincent Longo. These are way to similar to have not been copied from one another. I believe the D-Backs came out with that logo in '07 but Idk when Vincent's came out.

5318_logo.gif

253252165_792c6e496c_o.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I was out shopping w/ my wife and we were in Sephora when I noticed a Logo. And I wondered since when did the D-Backs make makeup. But no it was a guy named Vincent Longo. These are way to similar to have not been copied from one another. I believe the D-Backs came out with that logo in '07 but Idk when Vincent's came out.

5318_logo.gif

253252165_792c6e496c_o.jpg

Those don't even represent the same thing. The David Blaine I can kind of see, but not that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have heard through the grapevine that magician David Blaine has an issue with the D-Backs' logo. Here's David's:

DavidBlaineLogo.jpg

The grapevine is correct but a couple of things happen:

one's clearly a snake and the other is a misformed/upside-down spade

and, do "magicians"(term used loosely) need logos?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Vincent Longo and Dbacks are closer in relation versus David Blaine's logo...which is hilarious to know that he actually has a logo.

They're close, but I doubt anything will come out if it...pretty sure a MLB team logo will hold strong versus some lipstick company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bit of a stretch to think a designer for the lipstick company ventured into MLB land for inspiration and ripped off the D-Backs. Coincidence. When playing with the initials VL I can see someone randomly brainstorming that logo.... and they likely wouldn't think to research MLB for trademark / copyright issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and, do "magicians"(term used loosely) need logos?

No; neither does anything else. Replace "magicians" with "basketball players" or "pharmaceutical companies" and you get the same answer: They don't need logos, but like anything else that is marketed they benefit enormously from one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and, do "magicians"(term used loosely) need logos?

No; neither does anything else. Replace "magicians" with "basketball players" or "pharmaceutical companies" and you get the same answer: They don't need logos, but like anything else that is marketed they benefit enormously from one.

But I'm more apt to believe those other things DO need them as opposed to a phony who does stunts that aren't magic. Maybe it's just me(or an argument best left for another forum). But, the other things are brands. Being a guy who rides Leonardo DiCaprio's cotails isn't a branding necessity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and, do "magicians"(term used loosely) need logos?

No; neither does anything else. Replace "magicians" with "basketball players" or "pharmaceutical companies" and you get the same answer: They don't need logos, but like anything else that is marketed they benefit enormously from one.

But I'm more apt to believe those other things DO need them as opposed to a phony who does stunts that aren't magic. Maybe it's just me(or an argument best left for another forum). But, the other things are brands. Being a guy who rides Leonardo DiCaprio's cotails isn't a branding necessity.

Hey keep it down there!

We don't want Paris Hilton to even think about having a logo.

Then again, any instance of her actually 'thinking' would be as plausible as David Blaine actually levitating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.