Jump to content
Alan Moss

A photo of CLB on Ebay

Recommended Posts

I saw that earlier today, also saw an auction for one of Hiram's fountains end without a bid. :(

 

Don't they say "any publicity is good publicity"? Heck, Claude should buy the original for the distillery. I agree it is a good photo and the printing process seems interesting.

 

I was wondering why she isn't whispering "charlotte"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if it is the same as Worhol painting a can of soup or not, but despite my gut reaction thinking that it is bullshit and should stop, I don't think you can necessarily.

 

 

On The photo on his site) at least seems to a semi-correct name.

 

So, on the other hand, it may drive visitors to your site, (if you were in the top ranking on Google for your own product). Your compromise may be to ask him to name it correctly on his site and on EBay or even asking for link backs, at least some recognition of the source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a good photo. I, too, don't think there's much to be done against fine-art images except to get on the band wagon. If it was being used to sell something other than the itself that would be a different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

meh, mediocre photo, definite copyright violation, but it is advertising. At 100 supposed prints I wouldn't worry about it too much. I'm surprised the photographer wouldn't realize taking a picture of artwork doesn't mean he can sell the photo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has a lot to do with whether or not the artist has done much with your image. If an argument can be made that they've done more with your image than simply reprinting it, if they can show that they've reinterpreted your image, or shown it in a new way as an artistic expression, then they might have rights to treat the "new" image as their own creation and sell it as they please.

 

This is a slippery area, and extreme cases could be imagined that would make either side of the argument look silly. Here's one example that caught my eye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan,

 

I would check with a lawyer. Pronto.

 

If this "could" be considered a trademark violation then you HAVE to take action. To do otherwise would open this up to being used by somebody who later might CLEARLY violate your trademark, and then point to this incidence at an occasion in which you chose not to take action, and thus apparently didn't feel necessary to enforce your trademark.

 

...at least that's how it works in the US, and why there are so many times that Big Company, goes after an apparently innocently appearing, minor abuse of a trademark.

 

I've been involved in cases where as a Big Company I've had to come down on a small company who we really didn't want to, simply because we "had" to in order to protect our trademarks.

 

-Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in agreement with Hiram. And in this case I'd simply view it as free advertising. It certainly isn't harming the CLB name or image any. It would look bad to after such small potatos.

 

Actually, on this subject there was an extremely interesting and well-written article by novelist Jonathan Letham in the most recent issue of Harper's. The Ecstasy of Influence. Actually here it is. Though he only really touches on trademarks, as the focus of the article is on intellectual property.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×