Photographer Jacobus Rentmeester is accusing Nike Inc. of stealing his 1984 picture of Michael Jordan to create its iconic “Jumpman” logo. Rentmeester wants the U.S. Supreme Court to draw the line between when two pictures are simply similar and when one is a copy. More here. SCOTUS docket here.
Think of an artwork, song, film, video, poster, or photograph. In fact, with the omnipresence of social media, think of expression that any person—layperson or self-proclaimed artist—may disseminate into public space and which may be perceived as threatening to a group or individual. The creator of this expression may believe that her expression is just a “passive” and aesthetic expression of her thoughts and feelings and not an expression with intent to cause actual harm to a person or group. However, that person or group may believe, right or wrongly, that the expression constitutes a true threat against them. How then do we assess whether this threatening expression is ...
On December 28, 2018, Nirvana filed a complaint in California district court against Marc Jacobs for copyright and trademark infringement. Nirvana alleges that Marc Jacobs is using a smiley face design “that is obviously similar to, and an intentional copy of, Nirvana’s copyrighted image . . . with the minor differences unlikely to be noticed by the consuming public.” More here.
This NY Times op-ed has me wondering why writers--of any caliber and subject matter--still find it so attractive to publish via third parties. Of course, if that publisher gives the writer carte blanche, and all intellectual property rights to the work, then so much the better. But if writers, most of whom already self-censor, are also asked to sign an agreement containing a "morality clause" allowing their publisher to cancel the publication of that author's text based on the author's "activity" that the publisher deems to be "immoral" or "scandalous," then clearly the author is obliged to follow certain codes ...
[caption id="attachment_10187" align="alignnone" width="194"] The Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors, Even (The Large Glass). (1915-23). Oil, varnish, lead foil, lead wire, and dust on two glass panels. 109 1/4" x 69 1/4". Philadelphia Museum of Art.[/caption] At midnight on New Year’s Eve, all works first published in the United States in 1923 will enter the public domain. It has been 21 years since the last mass expiration of copyright in the U.S. So, for example, Duchamp's "The Bride stripped Bare..." will be in the public domain in the U.S. More here.
Evangelical Christian leaders and conservative members of the city council find her art to be indecent. “If Judy Chicago wants to be successful in a museum, well bless her little heart,” sixty-two-year-old John K. Thompson said at a recent city council meeting. “But not in a sleepy little town in the middle of New Mexico. A lot of her art is very sexual, more fitting for some liberal city far from here.”
More here.
Shepard Fairey has gone public and stated that “he will insist on the removal of his large outdoor portrait of Robert F. Kennedy at the school named after him” if said school destroys a mural by artist, Beau Stanton.
More here.
Eastern Unlimited claims that Rosier has violated both copyright and trademark law by producing, marketing and selling apparel that features a cartoon image of the NBA star wearing the mask made famous in the 1996 teen slasher movie “Scream.”
More here.
“It’s a strange tool to use to try to stamp out an organization,” said Ben M. Davidson, a trademark attorney in Los Angeles. “This club doesn’t exist because of its trademark, and I don’t think losing it is what’s going to stop them from being a club.”
More on trademark law and The Mongols, here.
Granted first in the United States, with other markets set to follow, the trademark has been awarded in recognition of Zippo’s careful manufacturing process which produces the highly distinctive sound, synonymous with the windproof lighter. It joins an exclusive line-up of other trademarked sounds including The Hunger Games’ Mockingjay Whistle and famed MGM Lion roar, among others.
More here.
The Illicit Art and Antiquities Trafficking Prevention Act (HR 5886), proposed in the US Congress in May, is now in limbo after the November mid-term elections. However, it could be reintroduced to the new Congress in January 2019, amid a recent rise in anti-money-laundering initiatives worldwide.
More here.
Clancco, Clancco: The Source for Art & Law, Clancco.com, and Art & Law are trademarks owned by Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento. The views expressed on this site are those of Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento and of the artists and writers who submit to Clancco.com. They are not the views of any other organization, legal or otherwise. All content contained on or made available through Clancco.com is not intended to and does not constitute legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed, nor is anything submitted to Clancco.com treated as confidential.
Website Terms of Use, Privacy, and Applicable Law.