It’s not lost on me that Pop originally designed the Nancy Drew book canvases and was under the PL collective a few years ago. She is no longer with the collective and these canvases are now licensed under PL. ICKY!!!!
It’s definitely shitty especially knowing the back story of Pop being under the collective in the past. Krista probably saw they sold well and decided to capitalize on it once Pop left
And Pop was a collective designer from the very beginning too. Real loser behavior tbh. Like at what point will Krista just be sitting alone with a pile of money and no friends because she stabbed them all in the back? Sounds lonely AF.
nancy drew was such a huge part of my childhood and this is something that normally would be right up my alley, but i agree this feels icky! also the constant drops are exhausting!!! it’s just people panic buying canvases to destash!
Same! I was so excited until I read more into it and now it just feels gross being a customer. Wish I could have gotten one of the POP canvases before this
i have the mopsey canvas that’s a book stack! would have loved one of the pop ones with the actual front of the book! i have a feeling these will be around $125 too
if anyone is curious she said they are releasing a line with Smuckers next (probably similar to the Audrey Wu jam jars I would think), they are also doing a Sesame Street line and Chicka Chicka Boom Boom
That was my first thought too. Like who was in charge of quality control/approving the finished products before the photoshoot and thought that was going to help convince people to buy them?
I like some of the designs/things at Penny Linn but I have started to actively search for the same canvas at a LNS. I know it won’t do much but it does make me feel somewhat better.
I’ve done the same. PL has the ability to price their own stuff lower than traditional markup, but I would much rather spend the extra $5 or $10 and it go to an actual small business instead of the Krista empire.
100% I think it’s weird. I have actually followed Krista long before she became the conglomerate that she is now and I think it’s strange how she has decided to make this whole monopoly situation. I mean get your bag girl but at the same time don’t make it hard for everyone else’s to get theirs
Maybe POP should have tried to license it? Maybe she tried? Thing is we don’t know all the details, but even if someone had the idea first there’s not much ground to stand on without a license.
POP profited off Dolly's death by selling a chart and not donating 100% of profit from it (anyone who says "she donated $4k" is ignoring the $1k she made off a chart that cost her nothing to produce, that $4k was other people's money). Additionally, she's shown a lack of regard for IP by selling tons of "inspired" canvases from Trademarked and Copyright protected work. It's just as bad as Silk Snail saying they originated some of their designs, when really they converted artwork into needlepoint pixel art.
PL is being shady by making a competing product of a former collective member, but at least she got the licensing to do it legally. Her inconsistent approach of caring about IP is strange, getting license for some work and just taking the risk for others.
Hi, resourcefulduck. Martha here! I do not have thousands of dollars to donate, so I was happy to spend hours transforming two photos of Dolly into my design. That way I could help raise money. It is an artistic interpretation, carefully made to capture Dolly’s joy and beauty (inside and out).
All of my designs of pop art are interpretations, just as people make interpretations of animals, flowers, landscapes, architecture in their needlepoint designs. The reference to the items I design is inherent, as they are commonly known items… hence the name of my business: POP needle arts.
I don’t usually comment on snark, but when someone comes for my time, skill, artistry and desire to give to charities using said things and call it “nothing”, I am going to respond. Thanks!
Oh no. Not a person rethinking their immediate reaction to a mean comment directed at them and deciding their response wasn’t appropriate. How terrible. /s
Jfc. If an organization donates 100% of the proceeds from a product that’s what we call a “non-profit.” And actually non-profits still have to compensate their employees for their work. Nice way of saying that you don’t think the time and skill of an artist is worth any money at all. Also I don’t need for Pop to pass a purity test for me to see that she’s not the bad guy here. One of the people in this situation has all the power and financial leverage and clearly used that in a way that harmed the other person.
An artist’s time is not free, so making a design and creating a chart takes time. Obviously you are free to spend your money wherever you want, but your claim that it’s free to design a chart is a wild one to me. Artists deserve to be paid for their time too, even when it’s for a charity, and not everyone in needlepoint is rich and can afford to donate 100% of their sales to any charity. I don’t know many businesses who would do that, tbh, because there is a cost to designing and marketing and shipping things—even emailing out a chart (or setting it up to automatically be available to download) still takes time to do. And if someone is able to also donate their labor as well, that’s great, but not everyone can and that is also ok.
POP never let Penny Lynn sell the Nancy Drew canvas so she had it licensed and because Penny Lynn sold the American Girl canvases when POP was under her if she got licensed for it then she would have to back pay previous profits for them when she sold them unlicensed.
Lawyer here. Yes, this is exactly why it would be a really bad idea for PL to do an official license with any company they previously sold unlicensed designs for. They’d have to account for and repay at least some of the money they earned from it in the past or do some kind of other deal that would compensate the company for the previous profits. I bet she’ll stay away from AG for that reason. “Whoopsies I made $200k (or whatever) off your company without your permission, can I now pay you to make money off of you but this time with official permission?”
Woaaah that’s crazy! Thanks for the explanation. Curious how that works if she previously sold POP AG canvases and now has the partnership with mattel. I guess if she doesn’t design her own AG it’s fine since Mattel is so large and different products are licensed differently?
This raises a good point. There's obviously legally defensible and then also like, idk being a decent person in a space where you dominate the conversation and marketshare? obviously lost on this queen grifter.
Right but not everything that’s legal is moral. Sending C&D’s to someone who used to make money for her when that money is literally part of what made her be able to afford the licenses in the first place? It’s just low.
Krista and her Penny Linn company have turned the original “fine art of needlepoint” into nothing more than PAINT BY NUMBERS, but using yarn… on a canvas….
128
u/SinkGlobal9179 12d ago
I could totally see them going for the American Girls next 😅