|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Mar 13, 2018 22:10:01 GMT
This week, fashion retailer H&M filed a lawsuit in Federal Court in New York, allegedly asking the court to essentially rule that any and all unsanctioned or illegal artwork, such as street art and graffiti, should be devoid of copyright protection and can be used by any brand or corporation, without any payment or even needing the artist's permission. This action taken by H&M is a full out assault on artists' rights and we must raise our voices. This could render millions of murals and important pieces of artwork worldwide completely unprotected and available for corporate use, without any payment or permission needed whatsoever.
We must not allow this company to use our artwork and appropriate our culture to sell their products, for their own financial gains, while at the same time allow them to devalue and delegitimize our artwork, our culture, and everything we work for.
This all began when H&M was caught using REVOK's artwork in an advertising campaign without permission. When REVOK asked them to stop, they responded by threatening him with criminal charges and filed this lawsuit declaring that all artists of unsanctioned artwork should be unprotected and have no rights whatsoever.
There are many things wrong in the world today, and most of them are far more important than this issue. But if we don't take action now, many of us may find our careers and livelihoods in jeopardy, or one day see our artwork plastered all over an advertisement for some brand we hate and there would be nothing we could do about it.
Go on social media, get the message out to the global artist community, and let H&M know how you feel about them. They have made it clear how they feel about us.
---- rrockenterprises.com
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Mar 14, 2018 0:40:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pingoo on Mar 14, 2018 8:50:06 GMT
Rather spending thousands in procedures they should pay artists for using their works.
Greddy little bastards...
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Mar 14, 2018 12:06:11 GMT
if this goes to court, depending on how high it gets, could be a landmark case with huge implications. happy that proper legend Revok is the one involved, and not some shitty johnny-come-lately artist
it's actually something graff artists have been claiming for years, Banksy team included - that even though their work is work in the public space and often done illegally, that the artist retains the copyright (intellectual property) of the work ... that there now might finally be a legal precedent, it could change the landscape of graff as we know it, for better or for worse, depending on the outcome and your point of view.... really hope it does go to court... will hopefully provoke some great debate
|
|
|
Post by clashcityrockers on Mar 14, 2018 12:14:05 GMT
This will be interesting the whole copyright on photos of art is very unclear. You just need to look at the Bristol museum thing all they done was take a photo. If I take photos of a wall in a shot for example, who holds the copyright ? The artist or photographer?
|
|
|
Post by tartarus on Mar 14, 2018 13:25:04 GMT
5pointz part Deux is what im hoping for. Business thinking its all important as usual. Barf.
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Mar 14, 2018 14:08:45 GMT
This will be interesting the whole copyright on photos of art is very unclear. You just need to look at the Bristol museum thing all they done was take a photo. If I take photos of a wall in a shot for example, who holds the copyright ? The artist or photographer? Not sure of the US take but in the UK if you capture something in a a shot that isn't the primary focus of the take i.e. a wall, then even if that wall / design has been copyrighted, then its not a copyright infringement . Permanence of the item and copyright status are key here, as well as the reasoning behind the shot itself. Its interesting stuff
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Mar 16, 2018 1:02:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by yobaby on Mar 16, 2018 10:14:24 GMT
Poor old Revok,he always seems to find himself embroiled with "the man". If anything, I'm pleased it's raised his profile because the brother has certainly done his time, literally and figuratively! Big fan of his and I really hope he kicks on even further with his new direction.
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Mar 16, 2018 11:08:25 GMT
Poor old Revok,he always seems to find himself embroiled with "the man". If anything, I'm pleased it's raised his profile because the brother has certainly done his time, literally and figuratively! Big fan of his and I really hope he kicks on even further with his new direction. looks like the pressure worked and H&M caved but agreed, Revok is one of the best artists working today so hope this gets him the attention he deserves
|
|
|
Post by dot on Mar 16, 2018 17:51:46 GMT
..more digging required.
h and m .. exactly ?
you wonder .. did they really think they could do what they thought they could do... who advised them. was this some kind of reverse publicity stunt ?
subversively subversive.. makes it... to the news and... kerchunck..?
|
|
|
Post by tartarus on Mar 16, 2018 22:03:29 GMT
Poor old Revok,he always seems to find himself embroiled with "the man". If anything, I'm pleased it's raised his profile because the brother has certainly done his time, literally and figuratively! Big fan of his and I really hope he kicks on even further with his new direction. looks like the pressure worked and H&M caved but agreed, Revok is one of the best artists working today so hope this gets him the attention he deserves Have they quit the case? I saw a FB post earlier saying they had claimed to back out, but had not killed the case in court yet. Cant find the post now though.
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Mar 17, 2018 11:47:27 GMT
|
|