Maybe the designer / agency / whatever, have both PayPal and Spotify as clients and they are on a deadline.... So they simply say "fuck this", and sold the same design to both clients?
I apologize but that's unethical on the part of the designer / agency / whatever. I believe paying clients deserve to have some assurance of newly generated creative being developed for them.
Don't take my comment too seriously there - it was a joke. :)
A video background with a button in the center?
Also brings up a good discussion point, what do you all think about this...
Whats the difference between copying because something works well and copying as stealing?
Is it giving credit? Changing it and adding to it?
I'd love to hear everyones thoughts.
It's not just video background with a button in the center (which is pretty cool).
It's video background with a button that is your company's main color.
Above the button "____ for every moment"
Below the button, a link for more information
The video needs to be vague shots of people doing things, but without emphasis on the people themselves.
At some point, when you copy every detail without adding your own twist, or understanding why that designer made that decision and how your case might be different and might warrant a different decision- things cross over from inspiration to theft. With design it's a particularly hard case. I think as designers we shouldn't be content to just copy the successful work of others, but take something successful and make it better, put our own twist on it, and improve. Then someone else will stand on our shoulders and do it again. This is the design equivalent of treading water and is lame for everyone involved (customers, the company, the designers involved in the project, and design in general).
Customers don't get an experience tailored to them like they should, they get an experience a designer from another company tailored to THEIR users.
Companies miss out on the chance to get really ground-breaking design that either gets attention from design circles or simply works so damn well people can't resist it.
The designers working on the project miss out on a chance to learn and grow, and simply have the un-gratifying task of being glorified human photocopiers.
The design community misses out because what could have been an incremental improvement on this design- 'video background with button in the middle' which could be built on is instead just a photocopy.
Great explanation. Thank you.
It does feel weak and you nailed it on the head as to why. It's a fit for another customer for another product.
Looking at their marketing I get that feeling and I have been in these designers position before as well, with business execs saying "Make that..." It's not fun for designers in that position and even worse for the outcome for users.
Thanks for taking the time to write that, I love it when people can explain why. Now I learned something deeper as to WHY its bad.
To be completely frank, if it wasn't for the tag line, I would have been content to write it off as a coincidence and think of the theft as not malicious. It's funny how the tagline changes all of that though.
When a large chunk of the industry is following the same trends and things like Bootstrap allow guys to quickly make something that is visually acceptable, it's hard for me to immediately conclude that are purposely ripping people off. It might not be rigorous design, but it serves its purpose.
It's a tough line to draw and I think people's backgrounds play a huge part in how you perceive this. As a very rough heuristic (by no means do I think this is universal, it's a generalization), I think developers by trade are much more willing to adopt reuse of designs. Designers by trade and education tend to be philosophically against the reuse of a design (by no means do I think that's wrong, it all depends on context). In some online discussions, I've found artists/designers are more sensitive to what connotes copying compared to developers.
It's not just the button or layout, but they even go as far as ripping the copy.
When I visited Paypal today, I was thinking "What's with the video? What message are they selling?" Now it's a lot more clear.
It's the "… for every moment" part that's a problem for me. The rest is just kind of following trends and doesn't surprise me.
That was my thought. Visiting the pages rather than looking at the static screenshots makes them feel less similar too.
I just don't think "_________ for every moment." is all that unique. I feel like I've seen it on a Visa commercial or some other sentimental, emotional commercial for a consumer product.
Refresh the page and you'll get another slogan:
"Pay at the speed of want." "You make it, we’ll make it pay." "Order without the ordeal." "Pay in the fast lane."
There are dozens.
I couldn't even find the "Money for every moment" one in the rotation.
Same. Kinda makes me think it was changed with some Inspect Element trickery to reinforce the point.
The PayPal UK website says 'Money for every moment.' and doesn't seem to rotate.
I want to believe that this is all part of some grand scheme, where Spike Jonze is secretly working with tech companies to create silent short films, lending towards a larger narrative and eventually becoming a major motion picture!
A man can dream.
"Money for every moment" barely makes any sense anyway.
This is one of those times where you can tell someone told a team "we need this, but for us" and there were no stops to consider what parts of the design did what, and which were useful and which weren't.
This has been done so many times at this point, who cares. Spotify wasn't the first to do it and Paypal won't be the last.
Yeah, and Spotify rips Rdio's design:
It's changed now, they must have seen this post.
It's changed now, they must have seen this post. http://awesomescreenshot.com/08c2qo9d56
Was expecting harsh criticism.
Do you work at Paypal?