Informació
- Categoria:
- Organitzacions - Entitats sense ànim de lucre
- Descripció:
- Louis Vuitton is suing a charity initiative supporting Darfur!
Louis Vuitton demands $ 24030.76 in daily fines if the Darfur supporting project do not stop the sale of their t-shirts with a poor black boy with baloon stomack and a designers bag and a Paris Hilton dog under his arm.
They claim the drawing is too close to their design, and will thereby shut down this non-profit initiative to support the poor people in Darfur.
What happened to the Freedom of Speech? And what happened to... (read more) - Tipus de privacitat:
- Obert: tot el contingut és públic.
Administradors
- Peter (creador)
Louis Vuitton vs. Darfur
Afegeix-teInformació bàsica
- Nom:
- Louis Vuitton vs. Darfur
- Categoria:
- Organitzacions - Entitats sense ànim de lucre
- Descripció:
- Louis Vuitton is suing a charity initiative supporting Darfur!
Louis Vuitton demands $ 24030.76 in daily fines if the Darfur supporting project do not stop the sale of their t-shirts with a poor black boy with baloon stomack and a designers bag and a Paris Hilton dog under his arm.
They claim the drawing is too close to their design, and will thereby shut down this non-profit initiative to support the poor people in Darfur.
What happened to the Freedom of Speech? And what happened to... (read more) - Tipus de privacitat:
- Obert: tot el contingut és públic.
Informació de contacte
- Oficina:
- http://www.nadiaplesner.com/
- Ubicació:
- Top of the World, CA
Darreres notícies
- Notícies:
- Read more reactions and comments on the case here:
http://digg.com/tech_news/Louis_Vuitton_Sues_Darfur_Fundraiser_for_Copyright_Infringem
Okay guys!
I have now commented on Louis Vuitton on Wikipedia. Hahahaha, so everyone looking into Louis Vuitton on Wikipedia may now know the trooth about the evilness of the company! Look under "Discussion". Hahahahha
Juhhuuuuu!!!
Now the DR.dk article comes up on the 5th position on the generic Google Search! With a negative article on Louis Vuitton!
So cool!
Info to everyone: Click on as many sites about Louis Vuitton, as possible. E.g. on news articles etc. The more hits the sites get, the higher they will rank on the Google Search!!!
Come on guys!
I find it necessary to add a few aspects to the discussion.
Because some people do not realise that there are more aspect in the problem than just “does it look like Louis Vuitton’s bag or not!” That is not the only question:
Pr wise:
PR mistake NO. 1. First of all, they may destroy ONE persons’ life and sue a private person, and not a company or organisation. They repeat other large companies’ mistake to sue a small artist, and threaten with lawyers and fines.
PR mistake NO.2. Louis Vuitton has made a big mistake using so much energy on this tiny campaign, instead of fighting the illegal China copies of their bags. This is a painting! Not a knock off! Before Louis Vuitton’s lawsuit, the campaign had only made a profit (to Darfur) of about 4000 Dollars. This is like NOTHING in their world.
PR mistake NO.3. From the communication point of view, this was just the worse PR scenario they should wish! Beside of suing a small artist, they chose a charity campaign supporting Darfur. From all possible problems Louis Vuitton may face, they chose the worse case of them all. The PR director will probably be fired soon, when they realise how much of a mess they have brought them selves into!
From the legal point of view they face more problems:
1. First of all, this is not a true copy of the bag. It is inspired by the bag!
2. There is no profit to the artist. All profit goes to charity. (This is still not a legal turn point, but may affect the outcome).
3. This is not a copy of a bag, but a painting. The scale of their loss (which they are suing her for is out of scale and impossible to prove!)
4. When Aqua made the song Barbie Girl, Martell lost their case. The reason? The reason being that Barbie has become an everyday word, used about more than just the dulls. Just like “hand me a Kleenex” or “Ill hoover the floor” kinda expressions. Barbie had become an Icon of a type of girl. Exactly the same has happened to Louis Vuitton. The whole reason why people recognise this bag is NOT BECAUSE of the name, but because of the recognition of the culture! It could be a Gucci bag or a Pringles bag or what ever bag. It only represents the “too much money” kind of culture. Therefore Nadia will probably win the case, as the bag is an icon and represents a culture, and NOT the brand Louis Vuitton.
5. They will sue her because she has the name Louis Vuitton on her site. Come on! She is not using the name to market her self. She is using their name because she wants to tell about the lawsuit put against her! Of course it is 100% legal to tell the world that Louis Vuitton is suing her! We do have freedom of speech.
6. The judges will probably find that the Freedom of speech is more important than Louis Vuitton out of proportions waste of their time lawsuit. Imagine if a writer can’t even longer write “I took a zip of my Carlsberg”. Because then he uses Carlsberg as a brand name. We must, as artists, writers, journalists, web developers and citizens be able to take photos of and write about names and brands, without getting sued. Am I committing an illegal act right now, by writing LOUIS VUIFUCKINTTON on my website???