the murder of a logo

{ part 1 }
In 2007, my friend Novita Angka, in the agency she worked in at that time, Octovate, created the logo for Visit Indonesia 2008. I do not have the knowledge of the background of the logo concept, but I do know that the font for the logotype was her own creation, a (very further and extreme) modification of an existing font, in order to truly captivate her perception of the brand, and to preserve exclusiveness of the Indonesian tourism identity (so that Visit Indonesia 2008 will not bump into its logotype on any other kind of design). She did not develop the complete characters of the type, for that reason also.
(go to) http://www.octovate.com/ (see OctoDesign's portfolio)
{ conclusion 1 }
According to the law, Novita (and Octovate?) owns the intellectual right of the logo, The Department of Tourism Indonesia owns the copy and economical right of the logo.

{ part 2 }
One day, she found in DaFont, a font named Indonesiana, (admittedly) created by Fizz Lab, with the characters "V", "I", "S", "T", "N", "D", "O", "E", "A", "2", "0", "8" exactly (down to every detail) the same as her type creation for Visit Indonesia 2008, only now it is fully developed to all the characters in a font type. Even the logogram she created for Visit Indonesia 2008 (an illustration of Garuda) is included (and dismembered into parts) as clip arts in this so called Indonesiana. Fizz Lab shares this font for free to personal usage, and sells it for professional usage. And Fizz Lab has already made financial profits from it, not to mention its claim as the creator of the font. Novita has received no (total zero) contact from this Fizz Lab regarding permission or whatever proper manner is supposed to be done in a case like this.
(go to) http://www.dafont.com/indonesiana-serif-free.font and the creator is this person
{ conclusion 2 }
So this Fizz Lab finds it normal, to simply trace an existing logo, develop the characters (which certainly will be based on the concept of the existing characters already made by Novita, NOT by Fizz Lab), name it Indonesiana, claim it as its creation, and gain profit from it.

{ part 3 }
Novita also found in DaFont, a font called Visit Indonesia 2011, which is a (very similar, however already been through) modification to the type she created for Visit Indonesia 2008 (and was later treated as mentioned above by Fizz Lab). In this page, Fizz Lab expresses its objection to this Visit Indonesia 2011, saying that they stole Fizz Lab's idea, and they should have requested Fizz Lab's permission prior making the font).
(go to) http://www.dafont.com/font-comment.php?file=visit_indonesia_2011_2
{ conclusion 3 }
So this Fizz Lab finds it normal, to simply trace an existing logo, develop the characters (which certainly will be based on the concept of the existing characters already made by Novita, NOT by Fizz Lab), name it Indonesiana, claim it as its creation, and gain profit from it. And then when some other party conduct a modification to this Indonesiana, Fizz Lab finds it normal to feel violated and demand a responsible feed back.

{ part 4 }
Novita has posted a reply on that post regarding Fizz Lab's objection on the page of Visit Indonesia 2011, politely expressing how she disagrees on Fizz Lab's statement on the Visit Indonesia 2011 page regarding permission while Fizz Lab itself has not done so regarding the Visit Indonesia 2008 logo towards Novita, or Octovate, or The Department of Tourism Indonesia (which as the client has the right for usage and ownership). Fizz Lab replies, that it simply felt enticed to develop Novita's type but had no idea how to contact Octovate (which obviously has a website with contact information) prior gaining financial profit from the font Indonesiana.
{ conclusion 4 }
So this Fizz Lab finds it normal, to simply trace an existing logo, develop the characters (which certainly will be based on the concept of the existing characters already made by Novita, NOT by Fizz Lab), name it Indonesiana, claim it as its creation, and gain profit from it. And then when some other party conduct a modification to this Indonesiana, Fizz Lab finds it normal to feel violated and demand a responsible feed back. But Fizz Lab finds it understandable if it did not conduct the same expected responsible manner to Novita, or Octovate, or The Department of Tourism Indonesia because (in this very widely internet-based life) Fizz Lab had unexplained difficulty to contact Octovate (a widely commercial agency which obviously owns a website, that if you have not known yet, can easily be found through Google search) and ask permission before Fizz Lab gains profit from the font Indonesiana.

{ part 5 }
By "creating" and selling this Indonesiana font, Fizz Lab has destructed the main reason of the original type's creation, which is to preserve identity exclusiveness for Visit Indonesia 2008. Now, Visit Indonesia shares the same type with a bunch of commercial goods products, books, and (God knows) what other products that Fizz Lab had proudly sold the font to.
{ conclusion 5 }
I believe that The Department of Tourism Indonesia must be aware of how this has destroyed its exclusive ownership of a logo that it had legally purchased for the purpose of Indonesian identity in the tourism world. And as the client (the owner) of the logo, The Department of Tourism Indonesia has the right to demand Fizz Lab's responsibility in this case.

{ part 6 }
Until this day, Fizz Lab is still out there, believing that by tracing the logo Visit Indonesia 2008, and then developing the characters (which certainly will be based on the concept of the existing characters already made by Novita, NOT by Fizz Lab), it has every right to claim itself as the creator of the font, believing that it has every right to gain profit from it, believing that it has every right to demand responsibility when other parties conduct as what had been done by Visit Indonesia 2011, believing that it cannot be blamed for anything because it had no idea how to contact the original maker or the owner of the type while having the guts to just go sell it to people even without permission from the original maker, or from the client (The Department of Tourism Indonesia).
{ conclusion 6 }
Apparently, Fizz Lab needs a simple basic moral learning, a little lesson on copyrights, and a high amount of design and typography knowledge and awareness.

{ ps }
I am writing this not to just bitch at this so-called Fizz Lab, but because I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that the person behind it might be running on a false logic on design and creative appreciation, and if it is so, it might be necessary to highlight this case for a higher reason or perhaps simply to just put ourselves in Novita's shoes and imagine how bloody annoying it is if this happens to us, as a designer.

Your opinion/ questions/ critics/ correction will be most welcome.

Thank you for reading.

A concerned mate,

Tatiana Romanova Surya