Justice say Justin Bieber album artwork was a “very conscious rip-off”

Rock

Justice‘s Gaspard Augé has spoken out over the band’s recent legal troubles with Justin Bieber, saying the pop star’s new album artwork was a “very conscious rip-off” of the dance duo.

The cover for Bieber’s sixth record ‘Justice’, which arrived back in March, references the pop star’s Christian faith by using a crucifix-style “T” in the title.

Fans soon began noticing the similarities between the logo and that of French dance duo Justice, who have used the font since 2003. The group’s management later revealed that Bieber’s team had contacted them about potentially working together on his new graphic.

Advertisement

However, they claimed that “the call was never completed”, adding: “No one ever mentioned an album called ‘Justice’ or a logo that says Justice. The first time we saw anything about it was the announcement.”

In a new interview with the Guardian, Augé discussed the situation and claimed that Bieber’s artwork was a deliberate rip-off of Justice’s logo.

“Though Bieber is from Canada, his actions fit this mindset of American hegemony: ‘Oh well, it’s just a small band from France, I’m sure we can take their name, nobody will care … ‘” Augé said.

“Obviously, we don’t own the word ‘Justice’ and we don’t own the cross. But [Bieber’s] management got in touch first to ask where our logo came from, so it’s not some unhappy coincidence. To me, it’s a very conscious rip-off. And that’s where the problem is.”

Advertisement

After the original controversy, Justice presented Bieber’s team with a cease and desist order over the artwork, claiming that the use of a crucifix symbol incorporated into the title ‘Justice’ constitutes as infringement, with Justice having copyrighted the graphic/word combination in France and the European Union.

“Your use of the Mark is illegal. You have not received permission from Justice to utilise the Mark,” the letter read. “Moreover, Bieber’s work is in no way affiliated with, supported by, or sponsored by Justice. Such use of the Mark is not only illegal, but likely to deceive and confuse consumers.”

Articles You May Like

SPOILER: Here Are Decibel’s Top 40 Albums of 2024
Jussie Smollett’s Conviction Reversed: A Shocking Twist in the 2019 Staged Attack Case
‘I Didn’t Have A Clue’: Creature Commandos Showrunner Tells Us The Two Characters That Concerned Him The Most, And What Finally Won Him Over
The Voice’s Adam Levine Threw Back To Season 1 With Blake Shelton, And As An OG Fan I’m In My Feels
Why I Swapped Paper Holiday Cards For Fun, Personalized Ecards From JibJabs