RSS
Louis Vuitton Strikes Again: Shuts Down Art Exhibit That Commented On LV Trademarks
from the parody? dept
Earlier this year, you may recall that we wrote about a bizarre and ridiculous lawsuit that luxury goods retailer Louis Vuitton had filed against Hyundai, because for a couple of seconds in a Hyundai commercial, a basketball is seen with markings that sorta kinda mimic (though, not exactly) LV's handbag design. This is the same Louis Vuitton that had sued a fundraiser who had made t-shirts to raise money for Darfur, which included an illustration of a "pimped out" Darfur victim who was holding a bag that also mimicked LV's designs.
I was reminded of both of these cases recently when I was catching up on recent episodes of the TV show Mythbusters. In one episode, the myth being tested is whether or not you can build a cannon out of leather. In the final attempt, Mythbuster Kari Byron decides to "decorate" the cannon, and does so with symbols that, again, mimic the LV design, turning it into a "designer cannon." Unfortunately, it looks like Discovery doesn't let you embed clips (why, Discovery, why?), but here's a quick screen shot that I took:
ChurchHatesTucker points us to the news that LVMH has shut down an art exhibit in Japan that involved sculptures of nine locusts, that were each made from counterfeit Louis Vuitton bags:
a play on the words batta ("locust") and battamon (slang for "knockoff"). According to the artist, the works are meant to raise questions about the relationship between authenticity and imitation in a consumer-driven society.It seems like that's a perfectly good subject for commentary through art, and it seems ridiculous that LVMH is stifling the artist's work. Nothing in this exhibit is going to make anyone think that it was endorsed by LVMH. It certainly isn't doing anything to create consumer confusion. The artist is pissed off, but the museum said it didn't want to deal with a legal fight, so this artist's work gets taken down as yet another company abuses trademark law. Watch out, Mythbusters, you may be next...
16 Comments | Leave a Comment..
- La La La La La: The Internet Routes Around Copyright Censorship To Restore Daria
- Beware Of Those Who Claim They're 'Saving The Culture Business' When They're Really Protecting Those Who Strip Artists Of Rights
- The Rise Of The 'Professional Amateur' And The Fall Of Gated, Exclusionary 'Clubs'
- European Court: Freedom Of Expression About Darfur More Important Than Louis Vuitton's Trademark
- The Companies Who Support Censoring The Internet
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
So if they had been made from real LV bags it would have been fine?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
This is getting damn sad...
But I guess that's what happens when you depend on an expensive name rather than a good product to make money...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
That's the implication of their complaint.
It's really bizarre, when you think about it. Could the Dial Corporation have shut down Warhol for exhibiting 'counterfeit' Brillo boxes?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Typically, putting something under the umbrella of "Art" keeps you safe from these sorts of things.
some examples: I once attended an art exhibit with computers and CD burners on display, where people were invited to download mp3s, burn them to disk, and take the CDs with them. The show was intended to be a commentary on how people consume music in the digital era.
Another example: An artist placed a pile of cocaine in the middle of the gallery, and for the duration of the show, he sat in a corner, blindfolded. people were only allowed to enter one at a time, and if they so wished, they could snort some. I think the show was supposed to be saying something about self-control and surveillance, but I did not attend this show, I only read about it after the fact.
And these shows both went off without a hitch. Under the umbrella of art, these activities were not a problem. The show must go on.
So...snorting coke in a gallery is fine, but using some Louis Vuitton logos in your art is a show stopper.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Parody
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Mythbusters is careful
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Sounds like their lawyers need a major beat-down.
But, as always, there simply is no justice in this world, because the lawyers have rendered the term obsolete. If someone were to unceremoniously beat the living crap out of one of these parasitic turds, I would be happy to contribute to their legal defense, assuming, of course that they actually ever get caught. No guarantees of that, is there? Lawyer whacking goes on all the time, sometimes right in the courtroom. I have no problem with that if they deserve it, which most of them truly do.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Mythbusters is careful
Of course not!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Mythbusters is careful
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Mythbusters is careful
Though there may be a couple of other reasons.
1) The Leather Cannon didn't work.
2) Mythbusters tends to blow things up at the end of an episode and they might carry that over to the end of a lawsuit! :-)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
fashion
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment