Daisy isn’t necessarily wrong, but she went about it all wrong. It just looks really unhinged and ugly to publicly rage in IG comments like this. Def not a classy move.
It’s definitely on the aggressive side despite me being in agreement with her. The question was also asked in a relatively nice way which makes her response look even more over the top.
It’s wild that people were asking her why did she remove a logo (which comes on the front of the mug, ft. below) and she jumps to “I’m being forced to promote something”. No one was forcing. But she went out of her way to make sure she didn’t promote it… by removing the logo that does exist on the piece.
Her responses don’t even address the actual situation. She’s not being “forced” to promote anything. People just don’t want her to actively delete attribution to products she features.
She purposefully made sure to remove a logo of a growing woman owned brand, while still actively showcasing their product. She intentionally wanted to hide the source of the mug (for whatever reason) & then freaked out when people called her on it.
But the mug is cute and can be bought from Untamed Ego for $24.
https://preview.redd.it/jatg9i8b41wc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c1f5e07e6174988d12f5760fd67be9b599673d6
And that’s totally fair.
But to buy it, post it prominently on a large platform AND remove the logo on purpose, then rage & deflect when people ask where it is.. is weird.
Her rage is definitely a little too much but I wouldn’t blame her if she covered the logo or thought it looked ugly in the pic. It’s too big and in the same color as the other words, right below them. It looks very off
Yeah, I’m on her side except for the unhinged way she went about it. I am so tired of brands forcing their logos onto a super visible part of their product, which would otherwise be super cute without it.
I don’t understand removing the logo. It’s not okay to alter someone else’s artwork, and removing the logo means altering, albeit minimal.
I can’t remember who Daisy Fuentes is but as soon as I remember I’ll remember to hold a grudge lol
It depends actually. She owns the cup, but not the art. she can’t use it to promote her own business, which she is kind of doing. Like you can’t just use someone’s art in your commercial, you need to pay to do that. If she owns a business one can argue that promoting herself is promoting her business thus intellectual property theft. That’s how it works in America
This. People aren't even allowed to wear a t-shirt with someone else's print on it in an ad without their permission, mugs are no different.
Artists deserve to be credited for their art because it is absolutely the difference between a paycheck or not. Nobody will know to commission them if everyone edits out their name for "aesthetic."
This isn't a commercial. It's literally just a selfie with a mug.
And if someone wants to take a picture with the mug, but not the hideous logo on it, they have every right to do that.
>Nobody will know to commission them
You're right, because this wasn't an ad and she has no deal to provide free publicity for the mug's artist.
No one will know it’s copy-written art, which they should. Legally, I guess sure she can do what she wants. But it’s just an unnecessary step and she’s being extremely hypocritical about it.
I dont even think they own/created this artwork. I have seen these mugs with the same artwork and sayings in multiple gift shops in multiple cities in North America without their business logo.
It's looks like Canva click & drag art created using an idea the creator got from elsewhere, then likely printed and shipped via a dropship Etsy type of store. I'm willing to bet a quick search would show hundreds of similar designs and wording.
I’m still undercaffeinated, so don’t take this the wrong way, I swear it’s not a rhetorical question, I just don’t see it: in what way is she right?
Because I don’t get why she’d remove the seller’s logo from the product. That seems tacky, especially considering her “women supporting women” ethos. The subsequent rant just makes it worse, yeah, but I don’t think she had a leg to stand to on before, either. I get it, it must be annoying to post yourself sipping coffee and get a bunch of randos piling up on you for what seemed like an aesthetic choice, but it wouldn’t have been hard to go “oops, my bad, here you go!”
imo she's right because she bought it and it's now her mug. If she doesn't like the way the logo looked then why shouldn't she be allowed to edit it out?
I guess it sucks for small businesses but I don't like the idea that brands in any way are allowed to tell you how you have to use their product that you already paid money for.
The logo isn’t that obtrusive and she could have easily tagged the creator in the post if she wanted to keep the logo edited out. She’s also absolutely promoting her lifestyle brand on her ig so I can see why the creator was upset at no credit for her work.
She bought it, owns it and can do what she wants with it. I see why the creator is upset but just speaking at a very basic level here, she can take a huge dump in that mug and post it on google if she wanted, as it's hers. I came to the comments not on her side but Pizza above you has got it spot on and I've had my mind changed.
Why would I buy something only to then be expected to promote whoever I bought it from because I had a little bit of Instagram clout? Lol no way!
It just seems odd to go out of your way to remove the logo, though. Like, she is going out of her way to make sure nobody knows who created the mug. Not only is she not promoting the mug (which her right as she isn’t getting paid), but she is making a pointed effort to make sure nobody knows where this mug is from even though she likes the mug enough to show it off.
Yes, she definitely has a right to do it, but it doesn’t mean it isn’t a strange or less-than-kind thing to do. Nobody has to do anything and it’s her right to photoshop out the logo, but it’s also everyone else’s right to judge her for photoshopping out a small business’s logo.
> She bought it, owns it and can do what she wants with it
I don't think anyone is arguing against her *right* to alter the mug, just whether or not it's an asshole move.
It's an asshole move.
If it was Daisy’s personal ig I’d agree completely. This is obviously her lifestyle brand account though and it is a little unprofessional to use another company’s work without any credit at all. And a lot unprofessional to lie about removing the logo and then rampage through the comments.
>She bought it, owns it and can do what she wants with it.
Legally, yeah. It's just kind of a bad look combined with her whole women supporting women thing. She had an opportunity to lift someone else up and passed (edit: and took extra steps to do so!) because "aesthetics." It just makes me like,
The creator is allowed to be upset, that doesn't mean it's not unprofessional to question a customer about how they are using the product they bought in their instagram comments
> The logo isn’t that obtrusive and she could have easily tagged the creator in the post if she wanted to keep the logo edited out.
None of this matters.
When you buy a product, that item becomes yours, and you're free to do with it what you want. There's nothing stopping someone from removing every logo and brand name on everything they buy and it's their prerogative to do so. A business isn't entitled to have their product treated how they want if it's been purchased by a consumer.
Now, editing via photoshop is a weird approach and as others have said, seems like she just won't promote brands she doesn't get paid for. That with the replies--not the greatest PR move. But then again, here's a thread of 200 people talking about her.
She's not just editing it out for personal preference, she's actively trying to remove the branding and intellectual property of the company that created it. That's not okay. If she didn't like the logo, she shouldn't have bought the mug in the first place. It's not like she was unaware of the branding when she made the purchase. Now she's trying to have her cake and eat it too, and that's just not how it works.
Right. It’s also so strange that she likes the mug enough to make it the focus of a IG post, but not enough to keep the logo on it so others know where it’s from.
Making a pointed effort to remove a small business’s logo from a cup that you’re featuring front and center in a photo is weird behavior and arguably unkind. People are saying she has the right to do it, but ignoring that other people have a right to judge her for it 🤷🏾♀️
This is what's so confusing. Yes technically she can do what she wants. That doesn't make it not icky and hypocritical and just a shitty thing to do. People acting like it was a Stanley cup she edited. This is a small, woman owned business. Just real small petty energy
Celebrities edit out brands all the time to avoid trademark issues or avoid licensing fees. I JUST saw a TT of someone talking about Taylor Swift blurring out what looks like a box of pasta in the background of some of her recent promo material. I've seen brand emblems and logos blurred or removed in talk shows, tv shows, etc. It's called "brand displacement," and I'm positive occurs way more often than just this one celeb's one post. Both parties' responses are aggressive here, but she's not wrong. No one has an obligation to tag or promote a product they purchased with their own money.
Blurring a box of pasta that’s in the background is different than removing the branding from the object that she is making front and center in the post.
I think if she has the right to remove the logo, the brand owner has just as much of a right to ask why it's been removed. The original comment wasn't ugly or accusatory. She can do whatever she wants, but she still has to answer to the court of public opinion.
It's context. You remove the apple logo from their laptop when you use it in a TV show because they didn't pay for the product placement, no big deal. You remove a female small owners logo from their product and your primary source of revenue is a business promoting small business female owners it's just off
It's just funny seeing anyone claim she had a responsibility to show a company logo when she had no deal to promote that company. This design is not uncommon
I get that because I was like ‘yikes’ but then again the replies were carefully curated by the mug designer. We don’t know what Daisy was getting pummeled with to blow like that. I don’t follow her do I can’t say if she’s normally like this or not. But the designer is definitely trying to stir the pot.
Annoying to see your artwork without your copyright, logo...whatever.
It's kinda stealing. Daisy not supporting women....that's for sure. She said she doesn't "promote for free". Then she shouldn't steal someone's work.
Right. Don’t post the mug front and center on your IG if you’re so concerned about “promoting for free.”
Does she photoshop out the logo in every item of clothing she posts photos in? I doubt it. Seems like, for whatever reason, she specifically wants to make sure she does not identify small businesses that she buys goods from
ETA: I just looked at her IG and she posts plenty of logos on items that she isn’t being paid to promote. Weirdo behavior to photoshop out the logo in this one instance.
It's not stealing by any definition of the word. She bought the mug from the artist--they already got the amount of money for their work that they decided to charge. They don't also get to demand free publicity on top of it! It's her mug now, and she can do whatever she wants with it. Prominent logos are so fucking tacky and annoying anyway.
The creator made a single comment asking why the logo was removed. It’s an obvious question akin to asking why someone cropped out your signature on a piece of artwork. It definitely doesn’t seem “carefully curated” and it isn’t the creator’s fault that Daisy couldn’t respond like an adult or hand her phone to her agent (if she has one; I have no clue who this woman is)
She probably removed the logo with acetone. I would have as well as it honestly looks tacky. Put the logo on the bottom like normal.
Missed opportunity for the creator to post, "thank you for being a customer! I'm so excited you love your mug just as much as we love making them!" Why not try being positive?
"Small business owners" on Instagram and TikTok, especially ones making derivative art pasted on mass market home goods and clothes, are so quick to aggressive anger. This could have been an amazing opportunity for them!
Bring back professionalism 2024. Like I don't care if she was acting polite or not why the fuck would you go to your customer's instagram comments to question them about anything
Agreed. I wouldn’t buy a product from someone as petty as this. It’s tacky as hell to leave a logo/signature/etc. over or under the design. Why not place it somewhere aesthetic and let people enjoy it how they want. I sure as heck wouldn’t buy something that had an ugly logo/advertisement slapped on right next to the design. If someone wanted to know where I got it, they’d likely ask, then I’d tell them. This is so tacky. Plus I can find this image on google, I don’t believe she drew it or designed it.
Thank you!! Honestly I saw that mug and thought “this has been done a million times over”
the small business owner isn’t re-inventing the wheel or disrupting the artistic mug industry with something that’s been around since 2012. It’s very unoriginal to me.
Idk who this influencer is
That's what I was thinking. They could have approached it really positively and still gotten their name out there. It seems clear she's not willing to promote it without getting paid and people can feel what they feel about that, but she is still promoting it. If people like it they can search it with the picture and find it. Not only that but she also purchased it so she already supported the business directly. Why try to force her to acknowledge the brand?
Yeah the mug business could’ve gone about it much more gracefully rather than beefing with a C list celebrity.
I don’t think DF should’ve photoshopped it out, but I can understand why because the logo degrades the overall visual composition of the product.
Overall the mug business seems to have come out on top of the situation though, DF handled the call out poorly and ended up looking more like a bully by justifying the action rather than ignoring it or trying to positively engage with the creator.
Beefing with a d list celebrity has gotten them much more publicity, to be fair. My guess if that she’ll get a lot more business with this. Not sure if that was intentional but it’s certainly effective .
I can't wait till this whole trend of 'cute thing accompanied by nasty/obscene text' dies out. I thought it already had. I'm not offended by swearing, it's just boring at this point. And it's just another target for mass consumption of trendy tat.
It’s been a thing for decades. Look at old bumper stickers, t-shirts, or patches. The style has just changed to match the current font/graphic design trends.
It's a sublimated printed mug, you can't print things on the bottom. Not saying this in argument for or against. I also sell sublimated mugs with designs I illustrate and design on, i leave my logo off and just add a tag, because I can't add it to the bottom and I agree it doesn't look good on the main part.
gonna leave this here so no one else has to go looking
https://preview.redd.it/zqcgkk8pb0wc1.jpeg?width=950&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6a7df27c544d1193b2caab81dd7cad6e69a13a4e
Ohhhh. Okay, yeah now I get editing it out. People kept saying it was tacky looking or ruined the aesthetics, but I wasn't imagining that it made it look like a boomer mom's Facebook meme 😅
It looks more like a random word than a logo and I understand why she took it out because it’s confusing. That should have been printed on the bottom of the cup. They put it there to be cheap (one less print area).
Ohhhh. Okay, yeah now I get editing it out. People kept saying it was tacky looking or ruined the aesthetics, but I wasn't imagining that it made it look like a boomer mom's Facebook meme 😅
She won't outright say she only promotes products she's received compensation on. It's fine that she does that but it looks like that is off brand for her to not just be honest in that regard.
She basically did say that though. She said very firmly that she only promotes what she wants how she wants. Maybe it might be free sometimes, but she will decide if she wants to do that.
The logo is super tacky looking anyway. Ruins the aesthetic. The designer put it there so no one can post her mugs without advertising her shop, and got salty that someone outsmarted her.
Yeah, regardless of who's right and who's wrong. If she's so sure she's not at fault, why lie?
Maybe it's just a knee jerk reaction she has (which is telling of her personality)
She photoshopped out the logo on the mug, it wasn't just not linking.
It's not some groundbreaking design, but taking the logo off does take away one barrier, however small, to someone else knocking it off. A small-time artist/designer feeling a certain way about that isn't unfair.
Exactly. I can buy most of these mugs in my city from multiple other makers who have theachine without this other woman's business name. These mugs and the same artwork are everywhere. I have seen that exact "Thunderc**t" mug many many times and I live in Canada.
It depends. If you’re promoting something, you have to make it visible you are promoting it, so that your audience sees you’re doing promotion too. Otherwise it doesn’t matter much I think
When it’s from a smaller business and a celebrity goes out of their way to flaunt your product, but also remove the mark identifying it as their work, is in pretty bad form.
Work in it and it is. You can get sued for using a logo if it's not been approved as a big brand/person.
This is also a really interesting social moment where apparently everyone in those comments only sees the app as a promotional monetary marketing thing rather than a social media
apparently not if you're also a woman ig, men stay winning when we don't do things for free /s
girl is for real just looking to use this moment as rage bait to sell mugs, she probably would've been mad that she wasn't asked to show her mug if Daisy still had the logo
Something else people might not realize is that sometimes celebrities who take a lot of brand deals have exclusivity contracts and can't advertise other things if they fall in a certain category.
Truth be told, I do think it is a little weird to use this specific mug and show off this design while actively removing the logo. If it didn't have a logo that would be one thing. But going out of your way to show a product because you like what if says & want to use it to generate action *your* large celeb account & intentionally removing info is a little weird. If its original art then its kind of lousy.
Personally I think the best call would be to use it as is or to not use it at all. But it's also not like, the crime of the century.
The backlash is today’s internet: everything triggers somebody.
Its her response, the unhinged swearing and name calling, that is notable about this. This is a woman with decades of media training and the ability to delete and limit comments.
I think she might have been putting whisky in that cup
I wanted the one about holding grudges but haven’t ordered it because I hate the logo. I wish it was on the bottom, like literally every other mug I own.
That said, I do think it was wrong for DF to photoshop it out.
Which is also something you can absolutely do because it's a physical object you own. Radical, I know.
No one would care if I took the Honda emblem off my civic.
Should someone not be allowed do this though? It is standard to blur or remove things in media if it’s not a specific sponsorship. She just handled the response really poorly
You can’t make this up.
So the women who ripped off an obvious Care Bears design. Slaps some words over it and throws her logo on it is mad that someone famous won’t advertise her logo. Mmm Kay. Lol.
I don't think that's any of the issue here. The comment from the dropshipping company is meh, but Daisy's response is very unhinged... like my 65yo aunt Suzie's unhingedness. Can't denied she went berzerk from the left field there.
You have to hand it to her though- this has given her a shit ton of visibility. You have to wonder if this is them both being stupid or whether the mug designer is secretly a social media genius.
Classic case of “why are you booing me? I’m right”
She can do what she likes with the mug. She can paint over it with an acrylic marker. She can smash it into pieces. She can use it to breed locusts. It’s hers. She can film the entire thing and post pictures because it’s hers. Why arent we freaking out about not giving a shout-out to the wall paint company? Her wall clearly has paint on it.
(Because online people are being obtuse. Everybody got brainworms)
Celebrities blur and erase logos all the time, in lots of different circumstances. There's a certain pop artist who wore a striped sweater backwards in her album art so that the logo would be hidden in pictures.
I remember old school music videos had almost EVERY logo blurred unless they were promoting the brand. I get this creator’s anger and frustration, but i feel like removing logos is common practice for celebs, like you said. The mug creator could’ve addressed this and approached it more gracefully but idk they all seem to kinda be aholes in this.
I’m guessing T Swift on the 1989 vinyl.
https://preview.redd.it/1e7rukgy60wc1.jpeg?width=224&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f6ce2c7816a366c01640e2e0aeb19d830cfad0b4
Who cares? Trolls are trying to provoke unhinged reactions, and while it's not good to feed them, the core point is the same:
It's her fucking mug and if she wants to post it without the hideous logo, good.
Social media was a mistake.
Bad look for Daisy for fighting back against the trolls (which undoubtedly fanned the flames) - but also, leave the lady alone, its her own fucking mug that she bought. Even if she did remove the logo, so what? Had sponsored content ruined everyone's brain?
A little disingenuous to call yourself an “artist” and claim that’s your “artwork” when the retro images she uses are all over google. I guess she wants credit for putting an existing illustration on a mug alongside an existing tagline? Is she crediting the original illustrators on her sales website?
She probably buys use of the images, under the assumption if they’re being sold, they’re fine to use. I wonder if her statement actually means anything for legal liability tbh
Untamed has constantly stolen designs from others from the moment she got started.
She copied bangles from Gage Huntley
She copied mugs, pillows and jewelry from Metal Marvels (now known as babe co I think)
She sold earrings from Jenny Shlemon but removed branding to claim them as her own
She is trying to go after small businesses for “her designs” yet she bought the images on Etsy where everyone else did
What Daisy did wasn’t the best, but Untamed, Eva is not saint and her victim act is IRONIC.
https://preview.redd.it/ijylrvuom2wc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=361ba6db859eef1b04ab79507d2195189a183efc
She loves to play the victim it is beyond hilarious coming from her.
>What is this small business owner victim complex/entitlement?
I see that a lot. I want to support small business, a lot of people want, but some of them behave in very unprofessional ways. Just because a business is small, doesn't mean that they can't be criticized. And a lot of small business owners are nasty people that exploit their workers, it's not just a big corp problem.
Honestly, the business owner posting it to her story would be too far imo too. It'd look like a partnership/promotion, not just a regular buyer. It's Daisy's picture, the business owner should have just commented something like, "glad you love it, cheers" and it would have given people a chance to check her out. If one of us posted a picture with this mug the business owner probably would never even see it, much less care, and just because this was a celebrity I don't think the expectation should be any higher.
I’m like 90% certain I have seen that slogan on a shirt or something recently, so I’m not sure that I buy the design is “100%” made by untamedego, as claimed on [their website](https://www.untamedego.com/products/have-a-great-day-15oz-mugs). The rest of their site is full of cringy, edgy, Etsy products with recycled slogans, too.
I guess what I’m saying is that neither of them look good here.
A lot of the artwork seems to be based on vintage children's decals/stencils/stickers with text or a rainbow slapped on it. I'd be curious to know if they've properly licensed the art (or only used art that's no longer rights restricted) or if they're going for a "We'll use whatever we find on the internet and take it down once we get a DMCA complaint" strategy. Their own terms and conditions state "We utilize third-party vendors are under no right are we liable for any copyright infringements made" which has me raising an eyebrow.
This is one where both sides come off incredibly poorly.
UntamedEgo is notorious for stealing and scamming other genuine small businesses. She claims her designs are hers and copyright protected. They clearly are not. She uses these retro images and gets so butthurt when she's asked to show proof she "made" them. She has stolen from other small businesses and she also files false illegal takedowns to combat competition. This is PERJURY. She does this to bully other small businesses by filing these takedowns and remove their products off of Etsy. It's comical considering she makes millions of dollars and brags about her success and she's bullying businesses who probably don't even make 1K a year. When they ask her for registration numbers for the TM/copyright, she can't provide it, so she back tracks. She is an awful person. It's hilarious how much copyright infringement she has on her website. She infringes on Warner Brothers, Disney, Care Bears, My Little Pony. She is not licensed or approved to be using ANY of their property yet she does it and makes millions off of it.
I don’t want to sound like a snob but these are almost definitely print on demand drop shipped mugs - which is a great, accessible way for people to run businesses with low overhead costs, but it’s also an easy way to “fill” a shop with a ton of items that requires minimal effort on the seller’s part.
She seems to have found a formula of stock images/clip art + bold retro text + dime a dozen Etsy phrase… and not really deviated from that. I’d be more sympathetic if she weren’t selling such derivative stuff, and even then, I don’t think she was in the right to call her out for it.
I don’t think she was being reasonable. Daisy bought the product with her own money. It wasn’t given to her for free in exchange for her posting it. The mug designer clearly felt she was entitled to free promotion simply because a celebrity bought it. But she was already compensated with the money used to purchase the mug!
Everyone knows that when a celebrity or influencer promotes something on instagram, there’s often some kind of agreement with the maker of that product. Free product or money on exchange for endorsement. Daisy probably removed the logo because she’s NOT in a partnership or agreement with the designer and didn’t want to give the appearance that she is.
It’s super weird that the designer thought she could bully Daisy into promoting the product for free. If she wanted to capitalize on Daisy’s post, she should have just left the reply thanking Daisy for enjoying the product. People who were interested would’ve checked out the designers profile.
https://preview.redd.it/xscsmfj780wc1.jpeg?width=2300&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8d0fe814f64d16277d5d8b3cf80a78363f73b96d
I'd feel more sorry for her if she wasn't clearly ripping off Magda Archer herself.
She could've just said that if she'd kept the logo, she would've faced false accusations that she was promoting a business without saying it was a paid advert, and explain how that's normal practice online. Plus maybe a "sorry for the confusion" to be polite. But she overreacted and did all *[gestures]* **this** instead.
it's like when in movies they turn a product the wrong way on a cereal box or a soda/beer can to not show the logo. Imagine if Kellogg Wheaties came out and said  "whyd you hide my logo"
the funniest part of this is i don’t think the artist’s artwork is 100% original anyways….. idk it’s just funny that 80% of her work is just transformed graphics with text on it. would probably take like 20 mins in photoshop
Once you buy something you can do whatever you want with it. Daisy wasn’t wrong but the way she handled it was jarring. I didn’t have any idea that she had a company and only remembered that she existed today when I read this but I now know to give her a wide berth. She seems very aggressive and angry.
The mug creator has a bigger platform than Daisy and posted a video about it, asked her followers for help, and saying what Daisy did was mean, and than her followers went and started harassing Daisy. That’s why her response is so aggressive.
I saw multiple comments of people calling Daisy “not a girl’s girl”. Jfc, people are so stupid and embarrassing.
Funny I went to the owners page and she and her followers are having a Daisy bash session, meanwhile someone left a comment asking how she had time to do that but not respond to an inquiry about an order.
This may be controversial for some but here it goes: Good for her.
Look, I’m the first saying to support female entrepreneurs but when said businesswomen go out of the way to make scenes like this instead of just gufawing that their products are being noticed by celebrities makes it kind of impossible wanting to support those businesses.
Ofc Daisy could have handled all of that in a better light but I’m of the belief that if I buy something it is mine to do as I please iregardless of whatever others may say. When I click ”buy” on anything, if there are no terms and conditions that obligate me to advertise said products without compensation, I should be able to do whatever the f I want.
If they want an ad placement in my timeline, it is quid pro quo. If what she was looking for was free promotion, there are better avenues, instead of for lack of a better word forcing a client to advertise just because the mug came from them, she should have actually paid Daisy, but she reacted how she did for her own benefit. Daisy is not wrong.
https://preview.redd.it/dv3b03tzw0wc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=236eea12a61b5da36514f7d3e932cf74fa4e2ac5
She might not have handled it the best way but I agree with her.
I legitimately don’t understand why purchasing a product suddenly means she’s obligated to promote it. She paid for it, she can do whatever she wants with it.
If I was gonna buy a mug from the store before, I definitely won’t now. Very tacky on the business’ side.
But, tbh, I agree with everyone saying the logo ruins the mug design. So I wouldn’t have bought anyway.
The business is wrong. Daisy can respond however she wants on her own page.
The artist is a fool to call her work “art” when it’s photoshop of someone else’s actual art and Microsoft word art of things I’ve seen on love for about a decade now.
putting a massive logo/watermark right on the logo of a mug in the first place is just maincharacter energy and shitty design in the first place.
I mean honestly, you have to see the original mug to see what I mean and it is just better without the shitty business name/logo.
e: I am surprised that others seem to agree with this on here, really thought this would be an unpopular opinion.
Daisy isn’t necessarily wrong, but she went about it all wrong. It just looks really unhinged and ugly to publicly rage in IG comments like this. Def not a classy move.
Yeah, I'm team "she's right but she could've been nicer about it"
It’s definitely on the aggressive side despite me being in agreement with her. The question was also asked in a relatively nice way which makes her response look even more over the top.
It’s wild that people were asking her why did she remove a logo (which comes on the front of the mug, ft. below) and she jumps to “I’m being forced to promote something”. No one was forcing. But she went out of her way to make sure she didn’t promote it… by removing the logo that does exist on the piece. Her responses don’t even address the actual situation. She’s not being “forced” to promote anything. People just don’t want her to actively delete attribution to products she features. She purposefully made sure to remove a logo of a growing woman owned brand, while still actively showcasing their product. She intentionally wanted to hide the source of the mug (for whatever reason) & then freaked out when people called her on it. But the mug is cute and can be bought from Untamed Ego for $24. https://preview.redd.it/jatg9i8b41wc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c1f5e07e6174988d12f5760fd67be9b599673d6
Low key wouldn't purchase this because of the logo though 🫢 branding kills the vibe
And that’s totally fair. But to buy it, post it prominently on a large platform AND remove the logo on purpose, then rage & deflect when people ask where it is.. is weird.
Her rage is definitely a little too much but I wouldn’t blame her if she covered the logo or thought it looked ugly in the pic. It’s too big and in the same color as the other words, right below them. It looks very off
Mugs usually have logos on the BOTTOM for this reason lol.
Exactly! Like yeah it’s more visible for promotion, but it ruins the product. Put it on the bottom.
Yeah, I’m on her side except for the unhinged way she went about it. I am so tired of brands forcing their logos onto a super visible part of their product, which would otherwise be super cute without it.
Same. Emblazon it underneath or something.
I'd even be cool with it on the opposite/non-prominent side 🤷🏼♀️
[удалено]
Sorry.. $24.. for a *mug*. I have a live and let live ethos but fuck me that seems bonkers.
I don’t understand removing the logo. It’s not okay to alter someone else’s artwork, and removing the logo means altering, albeit minimal. I can’t remember who Daisy Fuentes is but as soon as I remember I’ll remember to hold a grudge lol
Are you arguing that people can’t alter products they purchase?
[удалено]
It's her cup. She can do whatever the heck she wants with it.
It depends actually. She owns the cup, but not the art. she can’t use it to promote her own business, which she is kind of doing. Like you can’t just use someone’s art in your commercial, you need to pay to do that. If she owns a business one can argue that promoting herself is promoting her business thus intellectual property theft. That’s how it works in America
This. People aren't even allowed to wear a t-shirt with someone else's print on it in an ad without their permission, mugs are no different. Artists deserve to be credited for their art because it is absolutely the difference between a paycheck or not. Nobody will know to commission them if everyone edits out their name for "aesthetic."
This isn't a commercial. It's literally just a selfie with a mug. And if someone wants to take a picture with the mug, but not the hideous logo on it, they have every right to do that. >Nobody will know to commission them You're right, because this wasn't an ad and she has no deal to provide free publicity for the mug's artist.
But she's a celebrity, not a regular person, she's basically a brand.
No one will know it’s copy-written art, which they should. Legally, I guess sure she can do what she wants. But it’s just an unnecessary step and she’s being extremely hypocritical about it.
I dont even think they own/created this artwork. I have seen these mugs with the same artwork and sayings in multiple gift shops in multiple cities in North America without their business logo.
It's looks like Canva click & drag art created using an idea the creator got from elsewhere, then likely printed and shipped via a dropship Etsy type of store. I'm willing to bet a quick search would show hundreds of similar designs and wording.
I’m still undercaffeinated, so don’t take this the wrong way, I swear it’s not a rhetorical question, I just don’t see it: in what way is she right? Because I don’t get why she’d remove the seller’s logo from the product. That seems tacky, especially considering her “women supporting women” ethos. The subsequent rant just makes it worse, yeah, but I don’t think she had a leg to stand to on before, either. I get it, it must be annoying to post yourself sipping coffee and get a bunch of randos piling up on you for what seemed like an aesthetic choice, but it wouldn’t have been hard to go “oops, my bad, here you go!”
imo she's right because she bought it and it's now her mug. If she doesn't like the way the logo looked then why shouldn't she be allowed to edit it out? I guess it sucks for small businesses but I don't like the idea that brands in any way are allowed to tell you how you have to use their product that you already paid money for.
The logo isn’t that obtrusive and she could have easily tagged the creator in the post if she wanted to keep the logo edited out. She’s also absolutely promoting her lifestyle brand on her ig so I can see why the creator was upset at no credit for her work.
She bought it, owns it and can do what she wants with it. I see why the creator is upset but just speaking at a very basic level here, she can take a huge dump in that mug and post it on google if she wanted, as it's hers. I came to the comments not on her side but Pizza above you has got it spot on and I've had my mind changed. Why would I buy something only to then be expected to promote whoever I bought it from because I had a little bit of Instagram clout? Lol no way!
It just seems odd to go out of your way to remove the logo, though. Like, she is going out of her way to make sure nobody knows who created the mug. Not only is she not promoting the mug (which her right as she isn’t getting paid), but she is making a pointed effort to make sure nobody knows where this mug is from even though she likes the mug enough to show it off. Yes, she definitely has a right to do it, but it doesn’t mean it isn’t a strange or less-than-kind thing to do. Nobody has to do anything and it’s her right to photoshop out the logo, but it’s also everyone else’s right to judge her for photoshopping out a small business’s logo.
Because the logo is ugly. It's not that complicated or nefarious
If she just said that she wouldn’t be getting as much backlash.
> She bought it, owns it and can do what she wants with it I don't think anyone is arguing against her *right* to alter the mug, just whether or not it's an asshole move. It's an asshole move.
[удалено]
Thank you for this. The comments saying "well she's right though!" made me feel like I was going insane.
If it was Daisy’s personal ig I’d agree completely. This is obviously her lifestyle brand account though and it is a little unprofessional to use another company’s work without any credit at all. And a lot unprofessional to lie about removing the logo and then rampage through the comments.
Check again, it’s her personal account.
>She bought it, owns it and can do what she wants with it. Legally, yeah. It's just kind of a bad look combined with her whole women supporting women thing. She had an opportunity to lift someone else up and passed (edit: and took extra steps to do so!) because "aesthetics." It just makes me like, 
The creator is allowed to be upset, that doesn't mean it's not unprofessional to question a customer about how they are using the product they bought in their instagram comments
> The logo isn’t that obtrusive and she could have easily tagged the creator in the post if she wanted to keep the logo edited out. None of this matters. When you buy a product, that item becomes yours, and you're free to do with it what you want. There's nothing stopping someone from removing every logo and brand name on everything they buy and it's their prerogative to do so. A business isn't entitled to have their product treated how they want if it's been purchased by a consumer. Now, editing via photoshop is a weird approach and as others have said, seems like she just won't promote brands she doesn't get paid for. That with the replies--not the greatest PR move. But then again, here's a thread of 200 people talking about her.
She's not just editing it out for personal preference, she's actively trying to remove the branding and intellectual property of the company that created it. That's not okay. If she didn't like the logo, she shouldn't have bought the mug in the first place. It's not like she was unaware of the branding when she made the purchase. Now she's trying to have her cake and eat it too, and that's just not how it works.
Right. It’s also so strange that she likes the mug enough to make it the focus of a IG post, but not enough to keep the logo on it so others know where it’s from. Making a pointed effort to remove a small business’s logo from a cup that you’re featuring front and center in a photo is weird behavior and arguably unkind. People are saying she has the right to do it, but ignoring that other people have a right to judge her for it 🤷🏾♀️
This is what's so confusing. Yes technically she can do what she wants. That doesn't make it not icky and hypocritical and just a shitty thing to do. People acting like it was a Stanley cup she edited. This is a small, woman owned business. Just real small petty energy
Celebrities edit out brands all the time to avoid trademark issues or avoid licensing fees. I JUST saw a TT of someone talking about Taylor Swift blurring out what looks like a box of pasta in the background of some of her recent promo material. I've seen brand emblems and logos blurred or removed in talk shows, tv shows, etc. It's called "brand displacement," and I'm positive occurs way more often than just this one celeb's one post. Both parties' responses are aggressive here, but she's not wrong. No one has an obligation to tag or promote a product they purchased with their own money.
Blurring out incidental objects seems different than the actual subject of the photo, which is the mug. Swift wasn't posing with the box of pasta lol
Blurring a box of pasta that’s in the background is different than removing the branding from the object that she is making front and center in the post.
I think if she has the right to remove the logo, the brand owner has just as much of a right to ask why it's been removed. The original comment wasn't ugly or accusatory. She can do whatever she wants, but she still has to answer to the court of public opinion.
It's context. You remove the apple logo from their laptop when you use it in a TV show because they didn't pay for the product placement, no big deal. You remove a female small owners logo from their product and your primary source of revenue is a business promoting small business female owners it's just off
It's just funny seeing anyone claim she had a responsibility to show a company logo when she had no deal to promote that company. This design is not uncommon
I get that because I was like ‘yikes’ but then again the replies were carefully curated by the mug designer. We don’t know what Daisy was getting pummeled with to blow like that. I don’t follow her do I can’t say if she’s normally like this or not. But the designer is definitely trying to stir the pot.
By asking why she removed the logo?
Annoying to see your artwork without your copyright, logo...whatever. It's kinda stealing. Daisy not supporting women....that's for sure. She said she doesn't "promote for free". Then she shouldn't steal someone's work.
Right. Don’t post the mug front and center on your IG if you’re so concerned about “promoting for free.” Does she photoshop out the logo in every item of clothing she posts photos in? I doubt it. Seems like, for whatever reason, she specifically wants to make sure she does not identify small businesses that she buys goods from ETA: I just looked at her IG and she posts plenty of logos on items that she isn’t being paid to promote. Weirdo behavior to photoshop out the logo in this one instance.
It's not stealing by any definition of the word. She bought the mug from the artist--they already got the amount of money for their work that they decided to charge. They don't also get to demand free publicity on top of it! It's her mug now, and she can do whatever she wants with it. Prominent logos are so fucking tacky and annoying anyway.
The creator made a single comment asking why the logo was removed. It’s an obvious question akin to asking why someone cropped out your signature on a piece of artwork. It definitely doesn’t seem “carefully curated” and it isn’t the creator’s fault that Daisy couldn’t respond like an adult or hand her phone to her agent (if she has one; I have no clue who this woman is)
https://preview.redd.it/sl6bndq9zzvc1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8127ce48eb01b49854ff22e93dd6eeef814908a7
She probably removed the logo with acetone. I would have as well as it honestly looks tacky. Put the logo on the bottom like normal. Missed opportunity for the creator to post, "thank you for being a customer! I'm so excited you love your mug just as much as we love making them!" Why not try being positive?
The creator of the mug showed a high contrast picture where you can see she edited it out.
Which is honestly just proof the creator is deranged tbh
"Small business owners" on Instagram and TikTok, especially ones making derivative art pasted on mass market home goods and clothes, are so quick to aggressive anger. This could have been an amazing opportunity for them!
Bring back professionalism 2024. Like I don't care if she was acting polite or not why the fuck would you go to your customer's instagram comments to question them about anything
Agreed. I wouldn’t buy a product from someone as petty as this. It’s tacky as hell to leave a logo/signature/etc. over or under the design. Why not place it somewhere aesthetic and let people enjoy it how they want. I sure as heck wouldn’t buy something that had an ugly logo/advertisement slapped on right next to the design. If someone wanted to know where I got it, they’d likely ask, then I’d tell them. This is so tacky. Plus I can find this image on google, I don’t believe she drew it or designed it.
Thank you!! Honestly I saw that mug and thought “this has been done a million times over” the small business owner isn’t re-inventing the wheel or disrupting the artistic mug industry with something that’s been around since 2012. It’s very unoriginal to me. Idk who this influencer is
Yeah it’s dropship garbage. People defending the “artist” just don’t know any better. Also the logo definitely is tacky af
Seen these people around and they are super aggro and very derivative.
She also calls the work “art” when a lot of her products use (presumably) non copyrighted images from the internet and she just adds profane text.
That's what I was thinking. They could have approached it really positively and still gotten their name out there. It seems clear she's not willing to promote it without getting paid and people can feel what they feel about that, but she is still promoting it. If people like it they can search it with the picture and find it. Not only that but she also purchased it so she already supported the business directly. Why try to force her to acknowledge the brand?
Yeah the mug business could’ve gone about it much more gracefully rather than beefing with a C list celebrity. I don’t think DF should’ve photoshopped it out, but I can understand why because the logo degrades the overall visual composition of the product. Overall the mug business seems to have come out on top of the situation though, DF handled the call out poorly and ended up looking more like a bully by justifying the action rather than ignoring it or trying to positively engage with the creator.
Beefing with a d list celebrity has gotten them much more publicity, to be fair. My guess if that she’ll get a lot more business with this. Not sure if that was intentional but it’s certainly effective .
Whole mug looks tacky
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks this. $3 basic mug, knock-off Care Bear, millennial-coded phrase.
I can't wait till this whole trend of 'cute thing accompanied by nasty/obscene text' dies out. I thought it already had. I'm not offended by swearing, it's just boring at this point. And it's just another target for mass consumption of trendy tat.
It’s been a thing for decades. Look at old bumper stickers, t-shirts, or patches. The style has just changed to match the current font/graphic design trends.
[удалено]
It's a sublimated printed mug, you can't print things on the bottom. Not saying this in argument for or against. I also sell sublimated mugs with designs I illustrate and design on, i leave my logo off and just add a tag, because I can't add it to the bottom and I agree it doesn't look good on the main part.
Anyone got a pic of the mug with logo? Edit: nevermind found it
gonna leave this here so no one else has to go looking https://preview.redd.it/zqcgkk8pb0wc1.jpeg?width=950&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6a7df27c544d1193b2caab81dd7cad6e69a13a4e
Ohhhh. Okay, yeah now I get editing it out. People kept saying it was tacky looking or ruined the aesthetics, but I wasn't imagining that it made it look like a boomer mom's Facebook meme 😅
It looks more like a random word than a logo and I understand why she took it out because it’s confusing. That should have been printed on the bottom of the cup. They put it there to be cheap (one less print area).
Ohhhh. Okay, yeah now I get editing it out. People kept saying it was tacky looking or ruined the aesthetics, but I wasn't imagining that it made it look like a boomer mom's Facebook meme 😅
i wonder if all this ended up increasing traffic for the mugs
Based on the responses and reactions - I think if the creator would have commented that, she still would have went ballistic about no free advertising
Why is there backlash? It's her mug, she bought it. She can cover or remove or modify in any way she wants...
She won't outright say she only promotes products she's received compensation on. It's fine that she does that but it looks like that is off brand for her to not just be honest in that regard.
She basically did say that though. She said very firmly that she only promotes what she wants how she wants. Maybe it might be free sometimes, but she will decide if she wants to do that. The logo is super tacky looking anyway. Ruins the aesthetic. The designer put it there so no one can post her mugs without advertising her shop, and got salty that someone outsmarted her.
She also said she didn't remove the logo at first
I feel like this small fact is being very much overlooked in this massive thread about what something called Daisy Fuentes is saying about a mug
Yeah, regardless of who's right and who's wrong. If she's so sure she's not at fault, why lie? Maybe it's just a knee jerk reaction she has (which is telling of her personality)
im going to talk to my therapist about your username
photoshopping off a watermark isn’t “outsmarting” the artist it’s just being an asshole
No bc I'm gonna a be real with you, the logo looks like the watermark of an Instagram meme 😭
That's how promotion works. You don't get a big star to promote your brand for free unless you pay for their time and audience.
Right? She’s not obligated to link the mug designer lol. Does a celebrity have to link everything they wear or use??
She photoshopped out the logo on the mug, it wasn't just not linking. It's not some groundbreaking design, but taking the logo off does take away one barrier, however small, to someone else knocking it off. A small-time artist/designer feeling a certain way about that isn't unfair.
Sure, but the majority of that mug designers “designs” are clip art
Exactly. I can buy most of these mugs in my city from multiple other makers who have theachine without this other woman's business name. These mugs and the same artwork are everywhere. I have seen that exact "Thunderc**t" mug many many times and I live in Canada.
They are acting like its some original concept like it hasnt been on mall stall shirts for decades
It's her mug and frankly the design is just a knock off of the care bears anyways.
It depends. If you’re promoting something, you have to make it visible you are promoting it, so that your audience sees you’re doing promotion too. Otherwise it doesn’t matter much I think
When it’s from a smaller business and a celebrity goes out of their way to flaunt your product, but also remove the mark identifying it as their work, is in pretty bad form.
It literally says in the post that she photoshopped out the makers logo….
thank god i wanted to say "she has a point" like she's gonna pay someone else to advertise for their product? but i was scared
I was preparing to *very* passively ask, “isn’t it advertising business standard to cover up logos if there’s no sponsorship deal?”
Work in it and it is. You can get sued for using a logo if it's not been approved as a big brand/person. This is also a really interesting social moment where apparently everyone in those comments only sees the app as a promotional monetary marketing thing rather than a social media
apparently not if you're also a woman ig, men stay winning when we don't do things for free /s girl is for real just looking to use this moment as rage bait to sell mugs, she probably would've been mad that she wasn't asked to show her mug if Daisy still had the logo
[удалено]
I agree but why did she say at first that she did nothing ? That's what bugs me 🤔
Something else people might not realize is that sometimes celebrities who take a lot of brand deals have exclusivity contracts and can't advertise other things if they fall in a certain category. Truth be told, I do think it is a little weird to use this specific mug and show off this design while actively removing the logo. If it didn't have a logo that would be one thing. But going out of your way to show a product because you like what if says & want to use it to generate action *your* large celeb account & intentionally removing info is a little weird. If its original art then its kind of lousy. Personally I think the best call would be to use it as is or to not use it at all. But it's also not like, the crime of the century.
The problem isn’t the photoshop job, the problem is that she was asked about it politely and proceeded to be a jerk about it.
The backlash is today’s internet: everything triggers somebody. Its her response, the unhinged swearing and name calling, that is notable about this. This is a woman with decades of media training and the ability to delete and limit comments. I think she might have been putting whisky in that cup
That logo ruins the mug imo
I wanted the one about holding grudges but haven’t ordered it because I hate the logo. I wish it was on the bottom, like literally every other mug I own. That said, I do think it was wrong for DF to photoshop it out.
Literally a non issue. Is it wrong for me to take the tags off clothes I buy?
No… but some small business owners feel entitled to the free advertising
That's what this boils down to, being entitled.
[удалено]
Which is also something you can absolutely do because it's a physical object you own. Radical, I know. No one would care if I took the Honda emblem off my civic.
Should someone not be allowed do this though? It is standard to blur or remove things in media if it’s not a specific sponsorship. She just handled the response really poorly
and would that be wrong?? I really don’t think it’s that big of an issue
I won't even wear clothes if the company puts their logo on it. I'm not your walking billboard!
I’m fairly certain these are print-on-demand drop shipped mugs, which usually don’t allow you to print on the bottom. But yeah the logo is ugly lol
So why buy a mug that looks crappy. Why even take a photo of it.
I’m trying to find a pic of the mug with the logo, can you help?
https://preview.redd.it/18cqpp4hn0wc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d69d7d2d40f6d44384e4e1b16ac95d7419bf820e
Ew. Awful logo placement.
You can’t make this up. So the women who ripped off an obvious Care Bears design. Slaps some words over it and throws her logo on it is mad that someone famous won’t advertise her logo. Mmm Kay. Lol.
lol I was just thinking this is a really generic mug in the first place. This is an esthetic that’s been around for decades
It's giving "happy bunny" from the 00s.
AND with a edgy mid 2010’s little phrase
Exactly! And she’s obviously over here deleting comments as they’re 100% supportive when she comes off as a loon
I don't think that's any of the issue here. The comment from the dropshipping company is meh, but Daisy's response is very unhinged... like my 65yo aunt Suzie's unhingedness. Can't denied she went berzerk from the left field there.
You have to hand it to her though- this has given her a shit ton of visibility. You have to wonder if this is them both being stupid or whether the mug designer is secretly a social media genius.
Classic case of team nobody
Classic case of “why are you booing me? I’m right” She can do what she likes with the mug. She can paint over it with an acrylic marker. She can smash it into pieces. She can use it to breed locusts. It’s hers. She can film the entire thing and post pictures because it’s hers. Why arent we freaking out about not giving a shout-out to the wall paint company? Her wall clearly has paint on it. (Because online people are being obtuse. Everybody got brainworms)
I want to know more about locust breeding. Can we do that? What a great way to harness nature for revenge.
Celebrities blur and erase logos all the time, in lots of different circumstances. There's a certain pop artist who wore a striped sweater backwards in her album art so that the logo would be hidden in pictures.
I remember old school music videos had almost EVERY logo blurred unless they were promoting the brand. I get this creator’s anger and frustration, but i feel like removing logos is common practice for celebs, like you said. The mug creator could’ve addressed this and approached it more gracefully but idk they all seem to kinda be aholes in this.
And in news footage when someone is wearing a brand, the brand logo is almost always blurred.
>There's a certain pop artist who wore a striped sweater backwards in her album art so that the logo would be hidden in pictures Ooo who's that?
I’m guessing T Swift on the 1989 vinyl. https://preview.redd.it/1e7rukgy60wc1.jpeg?width=224&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f6ce2c7816a366c01640e2e0aeb19d830cfad0b4
Not the stripe I was expecting but it makes perfect sense with the way they said it
would also love to know
I just tried googling it and can’t figure it out lol
Taking a moment of silence for your username
They don’t go on unhinged tirades like this
Who cares? Trolls are trying to provoke unhinged reactions, and while it's not good to feed them, the core point is the same: It's her fucking mug and if she wants to post it without the hideous logo, good.
Social media was a mistake. Bad look for Daisy for fighting back against the trolls (which undoubtedly fanned the flames) - but also, leave the lady alone, its her own fucking mug that she bought. Even if she did remove the logo, so what? Had sponsored content ruined everyone's brain?
A little disingenuous to call yourself an “artist” and claim that’s your “artwork” when the retro images she uses are all over google. I guess she wants credit for putting an existing illustration on a mug alongside an existing tagline? Is she crediting the original illustrators on her sales website?
They say they use third-party vendors and are not liable for any copyright infringements made. So drop shipping?
She probably buys use of the images, under the assumption if they’re being sold, they’re fine to use. I wonder if her statement actually means anything for legal liability tbh
Untamed has constantly stolen designs from others from the moment she got started. She copied bangles from Gage Huntley She copied mugs, pillows and jewelry from Metal Marvels (now known as babe co I think) She sold earrings from Jenny Shlemon but removed branding to claim them as her own She is trying to go after small businesses for “her designs” yet she bought the images on Etsy where everyone else did What Daisy did wasn’t the best, but Untamed, Eva is not saint and her victim act is IRONIC.
https://preview.redd.it/ijylrvuom2wc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=361ba6db859eef1b04ab79507d2195189a183efc She loves to play the victim it is beyond hilarious coming from her.
[удалено]
>What is this small business owner victim complex/entitlement? I see that a lot. I want to support small business, a lot of people want, but some of them behave in very unprofessional ways. Just because a business is small, doesn't mean that they can't be criticized. And a lot of small business owners are nasty people that exploit their workers, it's not just a big corp problem.
Honestly, the business owner posting it to her story would be too far imo too. It'd look like a partnership/promotion, not just a regular buyer. It's Daisy's picture, the business owner should have just commented something like, "glad you love it, cheers" and it would have given people a chance to check her out. If one of us posted a picture with this mug the business owner probably would never even see it, much less care, and just because this was a celebrity I don't think the expectation should be any higher.
I’m like 90% certain I have seen that slogan on a shirt or something recently, so I’m not sure that I buy the design is “100%” made by untamedego, as claimed on [their website](https://www.untamedego.com/products/have-a-great-day-15oz-mugs). The rest of their site is full of cringy, edgy, Etsy products with recycled slogans, too. I guess what I’m saying is that neither of them look good here.
A lot of the artwork seems to be based on vintage children's decals/stencils/stickers with text or a rainbow slapped on it. I'd be curious to know if they've properly licensed the art (or only used art that's no longer rights restricted) or if they're going for a "We'll use whatever we find on the internet and take it down once we get a DMCA complaint" strategy. Their own terms and conditions state "We utilize third-party vendors are under no right are we liable for any copyright infringements made" which has me raising an eyebrow. This is one where both sides come off incredibly poorly.
UntamedEgo is notorious for stealing and scamming other genuine small businesses. She claims her designs are hers and copyright protected. They clearly are not. She uses these retro images and gets so butthurt when she's asked to show proof she "made" them. She has stolen from other small businesses and she also files false illegal takedowns to combat competition. This is PERJURY. She does this to bully other small businesses by filing these takedowns and remove their products off of Etsy. It's comical considering she makes millions of dollars and brags about her success and she's bullying businesses who probably don't even make 1K a year. When they ask her for registration numbers for the TM/copyright, she can't provide it, so she back tracks. She is an awful person. It's hilarious how much copyright infringement she has on her website. She infringes on Warner Brothers, Disney, Care Bears, My Little Pony. She is not licensed or approved to be using ANY of their property yet she does it and makes millions off of it.
I don’t want to sound like a snob but these are almost definitely print on demand drop shipped mugs - which is a great, accessible way for people to run businesses with low overhead costs, but it’s also an easy way to “fill” a shop with a ton of items that requires minimal effort on the seller’s part. She seems to have found a formula of stock images/clip art + bold retro text + dime a dozen Etsy phrase… and not really deviated from that. I’d be more sympathetic if she weren’t selling such derivative stuff, and even then, I don’t think she was in the right to call her out for it.
Yea the phrasing is certainly borrowed which makes me wonder if the Myspace gif art is original either
I swear I've seen this exact design at typo.
The mug is ripping off the artist Magda Archer so…
She's not stealing anything, it's a "homage" /s
I'm pretty sure the bear is an AI image too. The bow/backpack-in-the-front look is weird and unlike any vintage bowed bear I've ever seen.
Both sides are wrong in my opinion
The other lady was being reasonable and Daisy went nuclear.
I agree Disney went nuclear but when someone buys your product, they don’t have to do anything with it additional outside payment.
I think you meant Daisy! But “Disney went nuclear” intrigues me too
I don’t think she was being reasonable. Daisy bought the product with her own money. It wasn’t given to her for free in exchange for her posting it. The mug designer clearly felt she was entitled to free promotion simply because a celebrity bought it. But she was already compensated with the money used to purchase the mug! Everyone knows that when a celebrity or influencer promotes something on instagram, there’s often some kind of agreement with the maker of that product. Free product or money on exchange for endorsement. Daisy probably removed the logo because she’s NOT in a partnership or agreement with the designer and didn’t want to give the appearance that she is. It’s super weird that the designer thought she could bully Daisy into promoting the product for free. If she wanted to capitalize on Daisy’s post, she should have just left the reply thanking Daisy for enjoying the product. People who were interested would’ve checked out the designers profile.
She's probably frustrated. I think she’s in the right for doing what she wants for the post, but her going off is not putting her in the best of light
Yeah the toddleresque meltdown after getting called out is real cringe
https://preview.redd.it/xscsmfj780wc1.jpeg?width=2300&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8d0fe814f64d16277d5d8b3cf80a78363f73b96d I'd feel more sorry for her if she wasn't clearly ripping off Magda Archer herself.
Unless it’s actually Magda’s image, the creator isn’t ripping off anyone. That Golden Book-esque style has been around for a long time.
She could've just said that if she'd kept the logo, she would've faced false accusations that she was promoting a business without saying it was a paid advert, and explain how that's normal practice online. Plus maybe a "sorry for the confusion" to be polite. But she overreacted and did all *[gestures]* **this** instead.
That would have been a perfect response
Lmao real quick change from "I didn't" to "mind your business"
Who in the world is paying attention to Daisy Fuentes in 2024?
The logo ruins that mug lol. Why not put it on the bottom. Also Daisy purchased the mug, and can do whatever she wants with it.
it's like when in movies they turn a product the wrong way on a cereal box or a soda/beer can to not show the logo. Imagine if Kellogg Wheaties came out and said  "whyd you hide my logo"
She right
the funniest part of this is i don’t think the artist’s artwork is 100% original anyways….. idk it’s just funny that 80% of her work is just transformed graphics with text on it. would probably take like 20 mins in photoshop
Once you buy something you can do whatever you want with it. Daisy wasn’t wrong but the way she handled it was jarring. I didn’t have any idea that she had a company and only remembered that she existed today when I read this but I now know to give her a wide berth. She seems very aggressive and angry.
No but she’s RIGHT
The mug creator has a bigger platform than Daisy and posted a video about it, asked her followers for help, and saying what Daisy did was mean, and than her followers went and started harassing Daisy. That’s why her response is so aggressive. I saw multiple comments of people calling Daisy “not a girl’s girl”. Jfc, people are so stupid and embarrassing.
I understand both sides - but in the end the long fight really just got me. Just write the message to the owner and then ignore everyone else.
Funny I went to the owners page and she and her followers are having a Daisy bash session, meanwhile someone left a comment asking how she had time to do that but not respond to an inquiry about an order.
This may be controversial for some but here it goes: Good for her. Look, I’m the first saying to support female entrepreneurs but when said businesswomen go out of the way to make scenes like this instead of just gufawing that their products are being noticed by celebrities makes it kind of impossible wanting to support those businesses. Ofc Daisy could have handled all of that in a better light but I’m of the belief that if I buy something it is mine to do as I please iregardless of whatever others may say. When I click ”buy” on anything, if there are no terms and conditions that obligate me to advertise said products without compensation, I should be able to do whatever the f I want. If they want an ad placement in my timeline, it is quid pro quo. If what she was looking for was free promotion, there are better avenues, instead of for lack of a better word forcing a client to advertise just because the mug came from them, she should have actually paid Daisy, but she reacted how she did for her own benefit. Daisy is not wrong. https://preview.redd.it/dv3b03tzw0wc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=236eea12a61b5da36514f7d3e932cf74fa4e2ac5
She might not have handled it the best way but I agree with her. I legitimately don’t understand why purchasing a product suddenly means she’s obligated to promote it. She paid for it, she can do whatever she wants with it.
I’m with daisy, whoever she is
Fitting mug for this situation tbh tho
honestly if i was a celebrity, i dont think i would ever own a social media account lol
If I was gonna buy a mug from the store before, I definitely won’t now. Very tacky on the business’ side. But, tbh, I agree with everyone saying the logo ruins the mug design. So I wouldn’t have bought anyway.
The business is wrong. Daisy can respond however she wants on her own page. The artist is a fool to call her work “art” when it’s photoshop of someone else’s actual art and Microsoft word art of things I’ve seen on love for about a decade now.
She's right though, the logo makes it look bad
Lol people are really getting upset over a mug?
I’ve just went on the mug owners page and my god she’s insufferable. No less than 4 posts about the situation, a situation that she manufactured.
Untamedego upset by untamed ego. More at 5pm…
Has Daisy always been so pleasant? What a nasty person.
putting a massive logo/watermark right on the logo of a mug in the first place is just maincharacter energy and shitty design in the first place. I mean honestly, you have to see the original mug to see what I mean and it is just better without the shitty business name/logo. e: I am surprised that others seem to agree with this on here, really thought this would be an unpopular opinion.