Dedicated to clever and innovative trends of art and design in activism.

We seek out artists from around the globe who are using their talents for social change. We design for artists and activists at our other website.

Louis Vuitton Fire Spreads

James David wrote this post at 9:50 am on May 6th, 2008.

In the course of writing yesterday’s story about Louis Vuitton suing Nadia Plesner for copyright infringement, I stumbled across several blog posts (these are just a few of the more contentious ones) debating the legality and ethical aspects of Nadia’s Simple Living campaign.

It’s no secret that Groundswell isn’t a big fan of copyright law. I won’t run wild with analysis and conjecture, but suffice it to say that we find a considerable gap between contemporary culture and the paranoid, prohibitive laws that make up the current regime.

What do you think? Did Nadia infringe upon the Vuitton copyright? Did she do something ethical, though illegal?

Discuss (2)

My post isn’t contentious; it’s simply a legal fact.

Generally, if you’re going to take sides on an issue, it helps to pay attention to what the issue actually is. In this case, although the Vuitton print is subject to copyright protection, the company’s primary concern is trademark infringement. There are significant differences between copyright and trademark, and folks running in design circles need to grasp the legal nuances if they want to avoid unwanted attention.

Jeff,
Thanks for stopping by! I certainly didn’t mean to be disparaging with my comment. My apologies if you were offended. While legal precedence may back your statements, it’s precisely these rulings that are objectionable in my view.

I believe we share a concern for cultural artifacts before the law, but differ in our approaches. Not only do I feel the current status of intellectual property has run afoul of representing public opinion and serving the greater good, at Groundswell we encourage the use of alternatives, like the Creative Commons license we frequently use. More, even if an artist like Nadia intentionally violates copyright, I see it as a legitimate act of civil disobedience.

It is my hope that activists working on intellectual property issues can ensure that we won’t see another debacle like the lawsuit in question.

Leave a comment