David Yurman: Kate Moss For Fred Ads Are Total Ripoff (PHOTOS, POLL)

Kate Moss ads are a dime a dozen, as the supermodel has posed for Stella McCartney, Bulgari, Dior, Rimmel London, Versace, Yves Saint Laurent and more. Given how fashion loves to repeat itself, it wouldn't be all too preposterous if some of Kate Moss' many ads looked a tad similar, right?

Wrong. It is preposterous, says David Yurman. The jewelry company is in a huff, reports the New York Post, over a set of similar looking ads by jeweler Fred featuring Yurman's poster girl, Kate Moss. Fred's lastest Moss campaign looks "embarrassingly similar to the one David Yurman ran a year ago," a Yurman spokesperson told the Post.

David Yurman's Spring 2011 campaign, shot by Peter Lindbergh, depicted a topless Kate staring into the camera and grabbing lightly at strands of her wavy blonde hair, showing off the watch on her wrist and rings on her fingers.

One shot features Kate lying on a white fur rug, staring up at the camera with her elbows bent and her bracelets on full display.

In Fred's new Spring 2012 campaign, Kate is topless again, grabbing at her hair and showing off her rings, bracelets and necklace. Captured by photographer Sonia Sieff, her haircut looks similar, as do her poses -- she even lies down on a black fur rug (although this time while wearing pants) to showcase her wrist bling.

So do the ads look very similar? Yes -- Kate's got the same haircut, the same sexy expression, the same topless pose. But Yurman's ads still stand out: the Lindbergh shots are world class photography in Yurman's signature black and white and the jewels, wrapped in thick ropes of twisted silver and gold, are unmistakable.

We think Yurman needn't lose sleep over this one.

Take a look below -- do you think Fred's campaign is a total ripoff or is David Yurman overreacting?

Quick Poll

Did Fred rip off David Yurman?

TOTALLY! The ads are almost identical.

NAH. A topless model laying around with jewels on -- how else do you advertise for jewelry?

VOTE

Share your vote on Facebook so your friends can take this poll

RATE IT!   |  

VOTE

CURRENT TOP 5 PICK YOUR OWN TOP 5

USERS WHO VOTED

NEW! CREATE YOUR OWN SLIDESHOW

Comments

[Abelardo Perez]

06:54 AM on 12/20/2011

maybe those are the only poses she has....she's definitely overrated as a model

[Joseph Leslie]

08:03 PM on 12/19/2011

i'm a touchy, feely type of guy. You sometimes can't trust your eyes, so you need to use your other senses like touch, smell and taste to get the true impact. I'm ready, just send your limo by and I will only charge a small fee for my services!

[arkee2]

07:09 PM on 12/19/2011

I wish it HAD been a rip-off, might have had a chancd to see more of her back-side.

[MikeLoran]

07:05 PM on 12/19/2011

I need to see a few more, to make a better decision. :-)

[kaysings]

06:47 PM on 12/19/2011

Ok, so the ads are very similar, but Kate Moss' isn't the problem. Moss is fiercely popular in the industry because she photographs like a million bucks. The photographer is the problem. He copied somebody else's work instead of coming up with his own. It's as simple as that. Matter of fact, if I were David Yurman, I'd consider this extremely flattering instead of getting my panties in a bunch over it. Besides, the ads aren't absolutely identical. There are obvious lighting and prop differences. so no one would confuse one for the other.

[helensaghy]

04:41 PM on 12/19/2011

Yurman's jewlery is over priced and Moss is, as usual, overexposed. Who cares? If they keep it up with Moss, she'll have to leave the public eye like Cindy Crawford did. Cindy was also overexposed (in too many ads) that people got to the point they didn't 'see' here. When they said Moss in this ad, I didn't see her at all, just Yerman's over priced baubles. Even his jewelry isn't really original anymore.

[Pierre Fontaine]

04:15 PM on 12/19/2011

one eye is looking at me and the other is looking over my shoulder ---yeah very sexy lol

[belldn3]

03:56 PM on 12/19/2011

The jury is still out to lunch, can we see sexually explicit photos of her, so we can give a more conclusive opinion?

[Larry Richards]

03:22 PM on 12/19/2011

Kate Moss is the model. She is not the photographer, nor the sylist, nor the ad exec or head of creative that likely designed the ad and who more or less sketched the desired pose the photographer put her in. Someone picked her to be the model for the ad. Her pose, the fact that she is topless in the ad is determined by the art director's vision. If you think that the pose is a rip-off of something else, place the blame on the support staff. Leave her name out of it.

[shanefox]

03:04 PM on 12/19/2011

Does anyone, other than air-headded morons, care about this meat-market dribble?

World-wide war, famine, disease, terrorism and rampant illeracy and there are people who buy this crap?

I guess these pictures could be used as "poster-girls" for famine relief agencies.

[saphielssapphire]

02:23 PM on 12/19/2011

Regardless of what people say to rip on Kate Moss, I think she is still gorgeous. I hope she has many career pictures to come.

[colin72]

01:48 PM on 12/19/2011

I can't tell if they're the same or not.

Is she coked up in both? If so, then yes. Total rip off.

[littlepuffycloud]

12:02 PM on 12/19/2011

There's only so many poses a model can do to try and look sexy. Or dirty or strung out or sad or mysterious or whatever silly thing they think they're emoting. Even Zoolander had just a couple of good ones...

[TheIpsoFactory]

11:10 AM on 12/19/2011

Well, I think she allways looks the same in pictures - like a catatonic party girl waking up after a long weekend of drugs and drinks...

[-swift]

10:57 AM on 12/19/2011

That's totally different looks. In the second one, she's showing her new look - Blue Steel.