• Wassim B, over 5 years ago

    Or not... http://www.thefeebles.com/

    14 points
  • Jan Patawa, over 5 years ago

    Dear All, we are aware of the mistake since yesterday night as the agency responsible for the website and have apologized personally to all the influenced subjects including the art director of the original website and the client (Primeros).

    We unfortunately had no idea, that someone from our design team took more than inspiration from the The Fables website.

    What else to say, than that's obviously something unacceptable for us to tolerate in our creative process and we will take action on Monday to sort this out. Jan / BRAINZ

    13 points
    • Dirk HCM van BoxtelDirk HCM van Boxtel, over 5 years ago

      Oof. Strong response. Best of luck in dealing with the situation, and sorry it happened at your organisation. Never a fun thing.

      0 points
  • Ian WessenIan Wessen, over 5 years ago

    The link is 404'd for me too.

    For other comment viewers that are confused:

    I think the original link was to an Awwward page for the primeroscondom website. But it's nearly identical to the Feebles, a French design agency site.

    I can't be sure what happened, but I think OP is referencing an Awwward being given to a plagiarized site (assuming primeros copied the agency and not the other way around).

    3 points
  • Andrew C, over 5 years ago

    This is an interesting case study in how copies are not usually nearly as good as the originals. The Feedles website has delightful personality, a thoughtful but challenging layout, and is full of top notch content. The marketing site for Primeros ditched a lot of the brevity in favour of content marketing and the subsequent sub pages feel very laboured — weird fade transitions and stuff that obscure the content.


    2 points
  • Wouter RamakerWouter Ramaker, over 5 years ago

    It's actually really interesting that Awwwards took this down.

    Yes, the Primeros Condoms website is a blatant copy of the Freebles site. But it doesn't state anywhere in the legal terms on the Awwwards site that sites entered need to be unique.

    I can see that Awwwards might take a paid-for submission down, if they fear a backlash if a stolen design would actually win. And it was getting good grades from Chiefs and even Jury members on the site last time I checked before it was taken down.

    The community should take care of cases like this. But — from what I can see — the Awwwards community did not. There is no way to report a submission if you suspect it to be a copy/rip-off. If you are not a Jury member, you can't leave a comment. The only way the community could express their feelings is by giving it low grades. And in a perfect world, that should be enough.

    But down't we all suspect that the voting system works by mobilising a lot of people to vote for you (no questions asked), or by having a little tit-for-tat with other companies that submit their designs to Awwwards?

    For me, taking down the submission, shows that the voting system doesn't work.

    0 points
  • Perttu LähteenlahtiPerttu Lähteenlahti, over 5 years ago

    The page gives a 404. What was it?

    0 points