Do ethics matter when creating designs for print on demand platforms? Or is everything fair in love, war…and sales?
In this article I’d like to explore the uncomfortable issues surrounding ethics when it comes to creating designs for print on demand platforms. Do ethics have a role in print on demand selling? Is it the seller or platform that should set the standards?
These dilemmas can be viewed as being in 2 distinct parts: Firstly, the subject matter of our designs and secondly, the way we treat the intellectual property of others,
I understand that these are emotive subjects, and this article is likely to split opinion.
However, it is important to understand that the ethical values you apply to selling, may be radically different to that of other people.
Disclaimer: I have no intention of judging anyone and I am not trying to impose my view of the world on anyone else.
Now that’s out of the way, I think we can crack on!
1. The subject matter of designs
Merch by Amazon rules state that we cannot submit designs that depict or directly link to tragic events.
I’m sure that we’d all agree that this rule is needed.
However, the line can get a little blurred when a human tragedy transforms into a social call to action.
War Profiteering or social solidarity?
For instance, the Russian occupation of Ukraine.
Quite clearly the rules of Merch rule out a design that refers to individual incidents of loss of life. But it does not stop the publishing of designs that condemn the war or show solidarity for Ukraine. There are literally thousands of pro-Ukraine shirts on print of demand platforms right now. Is it ethical to sell those shirts?
Does the fact that Amazon, or whoever, allows those shirts to be sold mean you can sell them with a clean conscience? Or does that potentially leave you open to accusations of profiting from human suffering?
When the tanks rolled in, I saw videos on YouTube attacking sellers who uploaded Ukraine designs.
The argument being that even if you made no money, the seller still benefited via the tier system and algorithm.
I had sympathy for this point of view and respect anyone who did not upload due to their principles.
However, I also have sympathy for those sellers who wanted to promote the plight of the Ukrainian people.
I am not claiming that everyone who uploaded Ukraine shirts did it out of a sense of comradeship. That is obviously not true, but I do think there was a bit of a rush to judgement.
In my view, using your selling accounts to help promote causes you believe in is perfectly legitimate
Sellers just need to be careful of accidentally ripping off charities by stealing their intellectual property.
That’s my just my view of it and I’m not condemning anyone who thinks I’m talking out of my behind.
2. The way we treat the intellectual property of our competitors
There are some basics that every seller knows. If you use a copyrighted or trademarked image or try to piggyback off a known brand you are putting your account at risk. Its important to avoid this at all costs..
Pixel for Pixel copying
The other big no-no is pixel for pixel copying of another creator’s design. This is stealing, plain and simple. This usually involves cloning an entire listing word for word.
It is time companies like Amazon stamped it out. I think everyone…barring the thieves… would agree with that.
So, it is very clear where the majority stands on copycats…but what about the so called “Improvecats”?
Is it ethical to trawl through bestselling shirts and then make a so-called improved version of those designs?
Improving or copying?
Where is the line between stealing and improving?
Is it ethical to make a graphically different design but then copy the title and bullets to grab the successful keywords.
I admit I did use high BSR designs to “inspire” some of my early efforts at designing, though I have never copied the listing text.
The Improvecat method is put forward by many popular YouTube gurus.
These individuals have a massive influence on new creators who naturally do what they are shown. But is this unethical behavior?
I’m not condemning those guys, as the techniques they promote, are within the rules of most POD platforms. But maybe just because we can do something, does not necessarily mean we should do it.
Learning from experience
I think this whole ethical dilemma becomes clearer once you start to gain traction by creating original artwork. But the problem is that the many sellers never create those works.
I’m not a traditional artist and the only thing I can draw is a bath…
However, I do not look at BSRs anymore or constantly check what is trending on platforms. I mainly do evergreen designs that I construct using various graphical elements. I legally license those elements from places like Creative Fabrica or Canva.
If my designs look like other designs that are already uploaded, it is simply a fluke.
But again, just because I’m comfortable with my own ethical compass does not mean I condemn those who steer a different course. My way is certainly not the most profitable, that is for certain! And to many people the money is everything, which is ok too.
Let me know in the comments how you feel about BSR cloning and the idea of Improvecating as well as how you feel about the dilemma around Ukraine and social campaigning after human tragedies. Maybe you feel that all is fair in sales and that numbers and money are everything.
I’m not here to judge anyone…I’m just interested in whether ethics are important to print on demand sellers.
If you prefer video please click here to watch on our YouTube Channel.
