|
|
Post by cnh on Jun 21, 2015 9:18:28 GMT
We do have a couple of Maya Hayuk threads already, what with her print release etc but with the board getting busier they are likely to get lost in the mists of time.
I thought it would be good to have a separate thread for her that we can look back over time...
|
|
|
|
Post by cnh on Jun 21, 2015 9:19:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by cnh on Jun 21, 2015 9:20:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by cnh on Jun 21, 2015 9:21:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by grov on Jun 21, 2015 9:32:35 GMT
Nice. I like Maya.
|
|
|
|
Post by cnh on Jun 21, 2015 13:16:31 GMT
Maya Hayuk "Round the way" book... Grab yourselves a bargain  Published in collaboration with Nieves (ISBN) Edition: 1st Print: 20 pages, full colour
Cover: softcover Size: 195 x 255 mm ISBN 978-3-905714-79-1 In the olden days – when people still thought the earth was flat – the universe was sometimes compared to the inside of a human skull. This was our notion of the infinite that lies beyond the world we live in, as a reflection of the infinity of our powers of thought and perception. This comparison, and, using the Hubble Space Telescope, the discovery of the most far-flung corners of the universe, are the basis of Ultra, Ultra Deep Fields, by the Brooklyn artist Maya Hayuk. Maya Hayuk’s work, be it her large abstract murals or her smaller works on paper, is imbued with symmetry and colour. It is midway between the stellar clouds that the Hubble Telescope allowed us to see and the abstract patterns on Mexican blankets, Rorschach tests and holograms. Using a symbolism that also leaves room for spirituality, she expresses her love for what is positive and whole. Round the Way is a collection of paintings from the last two years leading up to Ultra, Ultra Deep Fields, Maya Hayuk's exhibition at MU. Next to Round the Way Maya Hayuk also compiled the double CD soundtrack Inside Spaces that will be available in a limited edition through MU. www.mu.nl/uk/shop/25/round-the-way/Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by cnh on Jun 21, 2015 13:19:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by artpie4000 on Jun 21, 2015 17:03:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Jun 26, 2015 23:53:56 GMT
   Coinciding with the release of their new Mini Frappuccinos last month, the promotional material features crossing stripes of colour often seen in the Brooklyn-based artist’s gallery work and outdoor murals. And if it’s true that Starbucks’ ad agency reached out to her last October regarding the project (which she declined due to her busy schedule), then it sounds like Hayuk has a good case against the chain. Her statement – “The scope and reach of the Frappuccino campaign is staggering. The infringing Frappuccino campaign artwork appears on both Starbucks’ United States and international websites; on the Starbucks’ Frappuccino website; on videos promoting various Frappuccino flavours; in print advertising; on product packaging; and in many, if not all, of Starbucks’ over 21,000 retail locations in 66 countries.” |
|
|
|
Post by j0hnny on Jun 27, 2015 2:23:09 GMT
In all fairness if you are going to make such simple work, then I don't think you can complain when you see similar patterns elsewhere. I'm sure plenty of people could claim that Hayuk has copied work if that's the case.
I like Hayuk when she's priced reasonably and I also (shock) like Starbucks. I had one too many shit overpriced coffees here in Oz - at least with Starbucks you are getting a decent shit overpriced coffee.
|
|
|
|
Post by looother on Jun 27, 2015 12:13:03 GMT
I don't think I would look at that cup and think it was a Hayuk rip-off, but I do think that if an advertising company reaches out to an artist with a very particular style, tries to convince them to work on a campaign and fails, they are (morally – I expect they've covered themselves legally) not then at liberty to create their own versions of that art for that campaign anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Jun 27, 2015 15:47:45 GMT
I don't think I would look at that cup and think it was a Hayuk rip-off, but I do think that if an advertising company reaches out to an artist with a very particular style, tries to convince them to work on a campaign and fails, they are (morally – I expect they've covered themselves legally) not then at liberty to create their own versions of that art for that campaign anyway. There was a major court case here where a company was trying to hire Tom Waits for a commercial or something, and he said no, so they hired a sound-alike. Tom Waits sued and won and it was considered a major win for artist's rights I don't know if Maya Hayuk would win the same case though, being the cups look more generic than her work, plus other artists have done similar styles before her. It will be interesting to see what happens though |
|
|
|
Post by alittle on Jun 27, 2015 16:21:47 GMT
I can't see her winning this. Pretty bold for her to think she has a trademark on intersecting colourful lines.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2015 16:39:00 GMT
I can't see her winning this. Pretty bold for her to think she has a trademark on intersecting colourful lines. True, how many companies use hirst style spots on kids clothing, toys etc, lost cause. Odd they approached her at all, its a design style and they have a dept of artists and designers, Maya stripes wouldnt be recognised as her work by 99% of the general public, she not exactly a household name, odd they didnt just get the team to do version if they liked her work. |
|
|
|
Post by blackappleart on Jun 27, 2015 18:44:08 GMT
I don't think I would look at that cup and think it was a Hayuk rip-off, but I do think that if an advertising company reaches out to an artist with a very particular style, tries to convince them to work on a campaign and fails, they are (morally – I expect they've covered themselves legally) not then at liberty to create their own versions of that art for that campaign anyway. There was a major court case here where a company was trying to hire Tom Waits for a commercial or something, and he said no, so they hired a sound-alike. Tom Waits sued and won and it was considered a major win for artist's rights I don't know if Maya Hayuk would win the same case though, being the cups look more generic than her work, plus other artists have done similar styles before her. It will be interesting to see what happens though She's off her rocker  |
|
|
|
Post by poledance on Jun 27, 2015 22:46:46 GMT
I suppose the question is do we care?
My care quotient is certainly lowered by the fact it doesn't look particularly like her work (but they did ask her)and the fact her work isnt particularly original.
So in answer to my own question. No.
|
|
|
|
Post by IggyWiggy on Jun 28, 2015 15:36:03 GMT
Did Starbucks Steal Maya Hayuk’s Art—Or Does She Just Sue a Lot?Maya Hayuk, whose recent Bowery Wall commission was a big hit with tourists and New Yorkers alike, is suing corporate giant Starbucks to the tune of $750,000, claiming that they used her artwork without permission for their “Mini Frappuccinos” campaign, according to the New York Post. What the Observer has discovered is that this isn’t the first time Ms. Hayuk has taken legal action against a corporation. In 2014, the artist sued pop star Sara Bareilles, Epic Records, Sony Music, and the luxury brand Coach after they used the previously mentioned mural as a backdrop for their ads and other promotional material. “When things like this happen, it cheapens the value of the art,” said Ms. Hayuk’s lawyer, “and her only source of income is her art.” The artist has done commerical work for Billabong, Microsoft, Sony, and General Motors, but said that she never signed her artwork over to the coffee giant, although they approached her about using the work in their campaign back in October. Ms. Hayuk lives in Greenpoint, Brooklyn, and has a BFA in Interrelated Media from Massachusetts College of Art (MassArt). She has shown her work at numerous institutions including the Hammer Museum in Los Angeles and Socrates Sculpture Park in Queens. observer.com/2015/06/artist-maya-hayuk-sues-again-this-time-its-starbucks/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2015 15:41:46 GMT
There's something about her murals that look very slapdash imho. not the quality of other peoples pieces. Would expect to see these in derelict shopping centre nr me.
|
|
|
|
Post by speebe on Jun 28, 2015 15:59:13 GMT
Did Starbucks Steal Maya Hayuk’s Art—Or Does She Just Sue a Lot?Maya Hayuk, whose recent Bowery Wall commission was a big hit with tourists and New Yorkers alike, is suing corporate giant Starbucks to the tune of $750,000, claiming that they used her artwork without permission for their “Mini Frappuccinos” campaign, according to the New York Post. What the Observer has discovered is that this isn’t the first time Ms. Hayuk has taken legal action against a corporation. In 2014, the artist sued pop star Sara Bareilles, Epic Records, Sony Music, and the luxury brand Coach after they used the previously mentioned mural as a backdrop for their ads and other promotional material. “When things like this happen, it cheapens the value of the art,” said Ms. Hayuk’s lawyer, “and her only source of income is her art.” The artist has done commerical work for Billabong, Microsoft, Sony, and General Motors, but said that she never signed her artwork over to the coffee giant, although they approached her about using the work in their campaign back in October. Ms. Hayuk lives in Greenpoint, Brooklyn, and has a BFA in Interrelated Media from Massachusetts College of Art (MassArt). She has shown her work at numerous institutions including the Hammer Museum in Los Angeles and Socrates Sculpture Park in Queens. observer.com/2015/06/artist-maya-hayuk-sues-again-this-time-its-starbucks/  |
|
|
|
Post by IggyWiggy on Jun 28, 2015 16:25:18 GMT
Saw this comparison on artnet. What do you reckon? I could see a couple of similarities but I'm no expert and certainly have no idea on the wording of the law. No such thing as bad publicity and all that, but will this give rise to people coming out of the woodwork 'demonstrating' how Hayuk has 'replicated' their work? |
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Jun 28, 2015 16:35:36 GMT
Did Starbucks Steal Maya Hayuk’s Art—Or Does She Just Sue a Lot?Maya Hayuk, whose recent Bowery Wall commission was a big hit with tourists and New Yorkers alike, is suing corporate giant Starbucks to the tune of $750,000, claiming that they used her artwork without permission for their “Mini Frappuccinos” campaign, according to the New York Post. What the Observer has discovered is that this isn’t the first time Ms. Hayuk has taken legal action against a corporation. In 2014, the artist sued pop star Sara Bareilles, Epic Records, Sony Music, and the luxury brand Coach after they used the previously mentioned mural as a backdrop for their ads and other promotional material. “When things like this happen, it cheapens the value of the art,” said Ms. Hayuk’s lawyer, “and her only source of income is her art.” The artist has done commerical work for Billabong, Microsoft, Sony, and General Motors, but said that she never signed her artwork over to the coffee giant, although they approached her about using the work in their campaign back in October. Ms. Hayuk lives in Greenpoint, Brooklyn, and has a BFA in Interrelated Media from Massachusetts College of Art (MassArt). She has shown her work at numerous institutions including the Hammer Museum in Los Angeles and Socrates Sculpture Park in Queens. observer.com/2015/06/artist-maya-hayuk-sues-again-this-time-its-starbucks/ Yes, but where's the comparison of the artists whose work predates and looks similar to hers. I don't see them suing |
|
|
|
Post by IggyWiggy on Jun 28, 2015 16:53:27 GMT
Yes, but where's the comparison of the artists whose work predates and looks similar to hers. I don't see them suing  |
|
|
|
Post by alittle on Jun 28, 2015 17:05:03 GMT
Those side by side comparisons are a joke. Sure, they bear similarities in that they are brightly coloured intersecting lines, but they are not identical, and she is not the only artist who does or has painted in a similar style.
I thought the quote from the lawyer was particularly interesting: "When things like this happen, it cheapens the value of the art”. Then the article goes on to note the campaigns that she worked on for Billabong, Microsoft, Sony, and General Motors, yet some how, slapping her colourful lines over their promotional material doesn't cheapen the value of her art?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2015 17:16:21 GMT
Cant say im a big fan of the works, nice colours and stripes pretty much, brightens a room in an interior design sort of way, adds a bit of colour. Nothing wrong with that, she has a lot fans, would be good to talk to her about her work though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Plip on Jun 28, 2015 17:20:33 GMT
I don't think artists should be able to lay claim to colourful stripes, spots, splashes or drips. But I really like the idea of Starbucks being sued.
I think a lot would depend on whether Maya had sent them any design proposals which are similar to what they eventually used?
|
|
