‘Tis but a pitcher,” he intoned. “It is what it is, no more. Of course it is derivative. We made no other claim. We are not in a competition for originality – this is not merely the internet. This is blogging. We meant it as a joke – and an offensive one at that – against our self (and any number of trolls), nothing more. Yes, we thought it was amusing, and the picture colourful. We included no requirement that the visitor buy the t-shirt should their eyes, whether accidentally, fall upon the image. But we did think that the more courageously risqué might wish to wear the t-shirt in the privacy of their own home or shopping centre and so we felt duty-bound to make it possible.

And with a grandiose sweep of his cape and a spring in his heel he was gone out the window, out of date, out of favour and out of ideas.

It looks like the cartoon/T-shirt has indeed appropriated the central idea of the earlier New Yorker one. It probably isn’t a breach of copyright because copyright protects the expression of an idea not the idea itself. Moreover, as Gilmae says, the idea is an old and unoriginal one. Is it plagiarism? Possibly, but that’s mostly an academic “crime” and cartoonists aren’t academics. I’m happy to regard it as derivative and an expression of a rather tired joke, but quite funny just the same.

I found the image at Roger Migently’s place. He has links. Apparently they sell it on T-shirts.

I should make clear, if it isn’t already, that the “ultra left” and “communist” epthets were tongue-in-cheek, or at least so I assume. James Farrell inserted the item and I just added my comment (I have read the whole report too – well, those parts pertaining to plastic bags anyway – and found it persuasive, although I obviously don’t possess the sort of economics and statistical expertise that you do).