I am confused...I love pop art. I have a painting on mind and I want to put a Batman jumping between some abstract figures, words and add some graffiti. Would I be doing something wrong?What about when photographers take pictures of a logo, let's say, Wrigley field sign, let's say a Coke billboard, let's say a model jumping wearing Nike shoes or any example like that?What about when a painter does a painting adding logos or brands, like painting a bottle of wine, or I recently painted a Perrier bottle, or what about doing a modern painting doing a collage of brands, or a painting of your favorite old time record or a Playbill or using a celebrity image in his/her painting?I've been trying to research about it but the explanations I found are more directed to copying a logo for a company or copying designs. Hope somebody has a better idea than me :) I'm confused...Thanks!
There is a difference between creating and reproducing as Mr Pixel Baio/Fariey/Koons have all paid to learn. Photography is not an easy art form which is why these above "artist's" resort to "using" others photographer's images. It is because they can't do photography, it is too hard for them. To let anyone "reproduce" one's image in a different media does not create a new art. AFA China goes, I will guarantee you that any image they (or the Philippines) get their hands on is as good as gone, just like movies/music CD's/DVD's they bootleg. They see this as free for the taking. I would NEVER send/FTP images to Asia for retouching/clip paths/large prints for this reason.
My head is just going everywhere because I have seen amazing work now that I think about in art shows, like somebody painting just the eyes of Marylin Monroe, or Elvis, another artist making purses using old records or play bills, etc etc etc. Personally I see it as art but not the law. I am from Mexico where these laws don't exist and if they do they are so hard to implement because nobody cares so I have to learn about this because TOTO... we are not in Kansas anymore, Thank you all for your advices and comments :)
A great many artists think the art show world is totally isolated from the rest of the world. There have been many times that I've been sent images to prepare that contained trademarked iconic images of James Dean or Marilyn Monroe laminated to a handbag or part of a mixed media collage. I had to gently explain that they could take their chances trying to sell it at a show but not to expect getting into a show with using someone else's art as part of their jury images.
There is an absolute answer to your last set of questions Carla. Try it and if you get sold our entire group will say 'i told you so'. :) That's the problem with this area. What one set of judges/jurors/lawyers would say was an infringement in another jurisdiction wouldn't get to trial. Remember - art is in eye of the beholder....
I'll add my 2-cents. My husband was a federal judge before he passed away. We've had this conversation...can I be sued.... many times. His answer was always the same. You can be sued for anything. You can be sued for crossing the street, but that doesn't mean they will win.
The thing you have to remember is, that lawsuits are very expensive. So ask yourself...is the risk worth it. Probably not. On the other hand, if you're a risk taker, go ahead, but it's like the sales tax we collect and file. We could, " not file" and maybe get caught, maybe not. With both of these situations, you can't say...oh sorry, let me go back and do it right. It's to late.
So making a 10% or a derivative change is always risky. The wrong person will always walk by. Remember Murphys Law.
And he was probably saying to himself that the celebrity likeness and the likeness the photographer created were both fair game.
An interesting situation is the famous 1959 Miles Davis "kind of Blue" album cover shot by Jay Maisel. Someone recently used the photo taking Miles Davis' name off the image and had to settle with Jay Maisel for $32,500. http://waxy.org/2011/06/kind_of_screwed/
Oops, I have to correct that he wasn't sued by RUN DMC, He was sued by photographer Glen Friedman that took the picture of Run DMC that Mr Brainwash used
Yes, Get it...I always had this questions in mind. I will read all that material you gave me. I didn't want to use Batman as a focus point, just as an add on. There's lots of famous artists like Mr Brainwash, Banksy, Burton Morris, Peter Mars etc etc that use lots of celebrity images and logos doing Pop art. I know Mr Brainwash just got sued by Run DMC for copyright infringement. He usually paints celebrities. I wonder if he asks permission every time he paints them, I guess not, otherwise he wouldn't be sued. So maybe those celebrities enjoy his work...mmm A new subject to study, very interesting, always good to learn these things
Comments
Larry Berman
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
Larry Berman
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
The thing you have to remember is, that lawsuits are very expensive. So ask yourself...is the risk worth it. Probably not. On the other hand, if you're a risk taker, go ahead, but it's like the sales tax we collect and file. We could, " not file" and maybe get caught, maybe not. With both of these situations, you can't say...oh sorry, let me go back and do it right. It's to late.
So making a 10% or a derivative change is always risky. The wrong person will always walk by. Remember Murphys Law.
An interesting situation is the famous 1959 Miles Davis "kind of Blue" album cover shot by Jay Maisel. Someone recently used the photo taking Miles Davis' name off the image and had to settle with Jay Maisel for $32,500.
http://waxy.org/2011/06/kind_of_screwed/
Larry Berman
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next