|
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Jareds Mind on Sept 14, 2020 19:16:39 GMT 1, Besides the greeting cards, isn't Brandalised also publicly profiting without permission?
IP law is a strange beast. You cany add any song to a video or IG without it getting flagged. I think some use of protected materials should be allowed for private consumption, but once you publicly monetize for profit, you should have to pay the royalty.
This ruling is disheartening.
Besides the greeting cards, isn't Brandalised also publicly profiting without permission?
IP law is a strange beast. You cany add any song to a video or IG without it getting flagged. I think some use of protected materials should be allowed for private consumption, but once you publicly monetize for profit, you should have to pay the royalty.
This ruling is disheartening.
|
|
Inknart
Junior Member
🗨️ 3,490
👍🏻 3,288
April 2015
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Inknart on Sept 14, 2020 19:18:00 GMT 1, Besides the greeting cards, isn't Brandalised also publicly profiting without permission? IP law is a strange beast. You cany add any song to a video or IG without it getting flagged. I think some use of protected materials should be allowed for private consumption, but once you publicly monetize for profit, you should have to pay the royalty. This ruling is disheartening.
Besides the greeting cards, isn't Brandalised also publicly profiting without permission? IP law is a strange beast. You cany add any song to a video or IG without it getting flagged. I think some use of protected materials should be allowed for private consumption, but once you publicly monetize for profit, you should have to pay the royalty. This ruling is disheartening. They're the same company... |
|
stavi
New Member
🗨️ 184
👍🏻 151
September 2017
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by stavi on Sept 14, 2020 19:26:21 GMT 1, 
Life imitates Art
Life imitates Art |
|
|
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Jareds Mind on Sept 14, 2020 19:26:48 GMT 1, Besides the greeting cards, isn't Brandalised also publicly profiting without permission? IP law is a strange beast. You cany add any song to a video or IG without it getting flagged. I think some use of protected materials should be allowed for private consumption, but once you publicly monetize for profit, you should have to pay the royalty. This ruling is disheartening. They're the same company...
Besides the greeting cards, isn't Brandalised also publicly profiting without permission? IP law is a strange beast. You cany add any song to a video or IG without it getting flagged. I think some use of protected materials should be allowed for private consumption, but once you publicly monetize for profit, you should have to pay the royalty. This ruling is disheartening. They're the same company... Thanks, I thought I heard that, but Mighty Jaxx never will comment on it. They're dropping a new figure like every month. |
|
gmidd
Junior Member
Addicted2Art.com
🗨️ 1,246
👍🏻 797
April 2014
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by gmidd on Sept 14, 2020 19:45:14 GMT 1, They're the same company... Thanks, I thought I heard that, but Mighty Jaxx never will comment on it. They're dropping a new figure like every month.
Are you saying that MightJaxx and Full Colour Black are the same company? I've bought from MightJaxx in the past (none of the Banksy stuff though), but will definitely not buy anything from them again if this is true.
They're the same company... Thanks, I thought I heard that, but Mighty Jaxx never will comment on it. They're dropping a new figure like every month. Are you saying that MightJaxx and Full Colour Black are the same company? I've bought from MightJaxx in the past (none of the Banksy stuff though), but will definitely not buy anything from them again if this is true. |
|
Rubberneck
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,050
👍🏻 1,433
October 2018
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Rubberneck on Sept 14, 2020 19:57:30 GMT 1, Full colour black and Brandalised are the same company.. not sure about mighty jaxx
Full colour black and Brandalised are the same company.. not sure about mighty jaxx
|
|
|
|
coller
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,384
👍🏻 2,371
April 2015
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by coller on Sept 14, 2020 20:57:11 GMT 1, The natural response to this ruling seems like "GDP Round 2: Harder, Faster, Stronger"
Or what if his response is releasing open edition unsigned versions of all his prior prints to maintain copyright over the images...
The natural response to this ruling seems like "GDP Round 2: Harder, Faster, Stronger"
Or what if his response is releasing open edition unsigned versions of all his prior prints to maintain copyright over the images...
|
|
coller
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,384
👍🏻 2,371
April 2015
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by coller on Sept 14, 2020 21:08:08 GMT 1, used the wrong word, my bad. replace 'copyright' with 'trademark'
used the wrong word, my bad. replace 'copyright' with 'trademark'
|
|
silvermyn
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,612
👍🏻 781
April 2008
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by silvermyn on Sept 14, 2020 21:11:32 GMT 1, Seems that the marketing of GDP was a big own goal. I do wonder how these things happen.
It’s not like team Banksy are short of cash, or that the brand isn’t worth protecting. They should have thrown the kitchen sink at this one. Surely their solicitor would have taken advice from a top QC in the area of Intellectual Property before advising on all aspects of the way forward. Surely Banksy’s people would have followed the advice to the letter knowing what was at stake. What on Earth went wrong...?
Edit - not trying to be critical of the lawyers or of Banksy’s PR people. It almost seems like they knew this wasn’t going to work and just wanted to draw as much attention as possible to what was going on with Full Colour Black perhaps?
Seems that the marketing of GDP was a big own goal. I do wonder how these things happen.
It’s not like team Banksy are short of cash, or that the brand isn’t worth protecting. They should have thrown the kitchen sink at this one. Surely their solicitor would have taken advice from a top QC in the area of Intellectual Property before advising on all aspects of the way forward. Surely Banksy’s people would have followed the advice to the letter knowing what was at stake. What on Earth went wrong...?
Edit - not trying to be critical of the lawyers or of Banksy’s PR people. It almost seems like they knew this wasn’t going to work and just wanted to draw as much attention as possible to what was going on with Full Colour Black perhaps?
|
|
Pawel
Junior Member
🗨️ 3,798
👍🏻 3,271
June 2015
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Pawel on Sept 14, 2020 21:15:45 GMT 1, Needs to open the shop again and sell more stuff - run it like a proper shop
Can't wait for limited edition of Banksy Happy Socks.
Needs to open the shop again and sell more stuff - run it like a proper shop Can't wait for limited edition of Banksy Happy Socks. |
|
coller
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,384
👍🏻 2,371
April 2015
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by coller on Sept 14, 2020 21:17:59 GMT 1, cant wait for him to sell stickers again 
cant wait for him to sell stickers again |
|
|
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Happy Shopper on Sept 14, 2020 21:23:19 GMT 1, It feels like it should be impossible for someone to profit from an artists work. I don’t understand how it’s in any way legal!
It feels like it should be impossible for someone to profit from an artists work. I don’t understand how it’s in any way legal!
|
|
|
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Jareds Mind on Sept 14, 2020 21:31:17 GMT 1, Thanks, I thought I heard that, but Mighty Jaxx never will comment on it. They're dropping a new figure like every month. Are you saying that MightJaxx and Full Colour Black are the same company? I've bought from MightJaxx in the past (none of the Banksy stuff though), but will definitely not buy anything from them again if this is true.
Thanks, I thought I heard that, but Mighty Jaxx never will comment on it. They're dropping a new figure like every month. Are you saying that MightJaxx and Full Colour Black are the same company? I've bought from MightJaxx in the past (none of the Banksy stuff though), but will definitely not buy anything from them again if this is true. MightyJaxx is a toy maker, or I guess a toy broker. They just say, "licensed by Brandalised" They will not respond to any comments about them using a non-licensed Banksy image. When I first saw the flower thrower I was interested, but then learned more. |
|
|
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Street Arted 2020 on Sept 14, 2020 21:54:38 GMT 1, cant wait for him to sell stickers again 
cant wait for him to sell stickers again |
|
|
|
silvermyn
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,612
👍🏻 781
April 2008
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by silvermyn on Sept 14, 2020 22:02:14 GMT 1, All I take from that is that Full Colour Black are a bunch of full colour kuntz. To trademark someone else’s work regardless of how they feel about copyright is shocking. Agreed. Shocking that the EU has endorsed it. Morally bankrupt.
I’m sure if the Daily Hate get hold of this story it will make the front page with a big picture of the Union Jack in the background, and the standard paragraph on how pissed Jean-Claude Juncker managed to get himself (like none of their senior people have ever got drunk using their employer’s credit card).
All I take from that is that Full Colour Black are a bunch of full colour kuntz. To trademark someone else’s work regardless of how they feel about copyright is shocking. Agreed. Shocking that the EU has endorsed it. Morally bankrupt. Don’t worry buffin. I’m sure if the Daily Hate get hold of this story it will make the front page with a big picture of the Union Jack in the background, and the standard paragraph on how pissed Jean-Claude Juncker managed to get himself (like none of their senior people have ever got drunk using their employer’s credit card). |
|
acaipride
New Member
🗨️ 906
👍🏻 447
April 2020
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by acaipride on Sept 14, 2020 22:16:17 GMT 1, I theoretically propose that we theorize a hiring on some theoretical deep website of a theorized DDOS attack group to theoretically bombard their website, theoretically.
What say you?
I theoretically propose that we theorize a hiring on some theoretical deep website of a theorized DDOS attack group to theoretically bombard their website, theoretically.
What say you?
|
|
acaipride
New Member
🗨️ 906
👍🏻 447
April 2020
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by acaipride on Sept 14, 2020 22:21:59 GMT 1, The natural response to this ruling seems like "GDP Round 2: Harder, Faster, Stronger" Or what if his response is releasing open edition unsigned versions of all his prior prints to maintain copyright over the images...
You know...I was thinking about this exact thing the other day..such a blue chip asset, the brand knows in a repeat of a cycle they will be back in the same valued position...do like the recent blue chip stocks and split...
I've only realized this can be a possibility when recently an artist I follow decided to take the image of one of his grails and "split" it's value by performing an announced full series of new and different editions with it...
Stock splits ,..art stock splits 🤔🤔🤔
The natural response to this ruling seems like "GDP Round 2: Harder, Faster, Stronger" Or what if his response is releasing open edition unsigned versions of all his prior prints to maintain copyright over the images... You know...I was thinking about this exact thing the other day..such a blue chip asset, the brand knows in a repeat of a cycle they will be back in the same valued position...do like the recent blue chip stocks and split... I've only realized this can be a possibility when recently an artist I follow decided to take the image of one of his grails and "split" it's value by performing an announced full series of new and different editions with it... Stock splits ,..art stock splits 🤔🤔🤔 |
|
urbanflik
New Member
🗨️ 484
👍🏻 372
February 2010
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by urbanflik on Sept 14, 2020 22:23:22 GMT 1, LOIC theoretically
on second thought please don’t google that!
LOIC theoretically
on second thought please don’t google that!
|
|
acaipride
New Member
🗨️ 906
👍🏻 447
April 2020
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by acaipride on Sept 14, 2020 22:31:31 GMT 1, LOIC theoretically on second thought please don’t google that!
Just the acronym sounds stressfull, theoretically
LOIC theoretically on second thought please don’t google that! Just the acronym sounds stressfull, theoretically |
|
coller
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,384
👍🏻 2,371
April 2015
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by coller on Sept 14, 2020 22:37:58 GMT 1, The natural response to this ruling seems like "GDP Round 2: Harder, Faster, Stronger" Or what if his response is releasing open edition unsigned versions of all his prior prints to maintain copyright over the images... You know...I was thinking about this exact thing the other day..such a blue chip asset, the brand knows in a repeat of a cycle they will be back in the same valued position...do like the recent blue chip stocks and split... I've only realized this can be a possibility when recently an artist I follow decided to take the image of one of his grails and "split" it's value by performing an announced full series of new and different editions with it... Stock splits ,..art stock splits 🤔🤔🤔
pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP.
The natural response to this ruling seems like "GDP Round 2: Harder, Faster, Stronger" Or what if his response is releasing open edition unsigned versions of all his prior prints to maintain copyright over the images... You know...I was thinking about this exact thing the other day..such a blue chip asset, the brand knows in a repeat of a cycle they will be back in the same valued position...do like the recent blue chip stocks and split... I've only realized this can be a possibility when recently an artist I follow decided to take the image of one of his grails and "split" it's value by performing an announced full series of new and different editions with it... Stock splits ,..art stock splits 🤔🤔🤔 i always had a theory that banksy would purposefully implode his unsigned print market as one of his 'stunts' pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP. |
|
FЯ
Full Member
🗨️ 8,264
👍🏻 9,252
May 2013
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by FЯ on Sept 14, 2020 22:41:40 GMT 1, You know...I was thinking about this exact thing the other day..such a blue chip asset, the brand knows in a repeat of a cycle they will be back in the same valued position...do like the recent blue chip stocks and split... I've only realized this can be a possibility when recently an artist I follow decided to take the image of one of his grails and "split" it's value by performing an announced full series of new and different editions with it... Stock splits ,..art stock splits 🤔🤔🤔 i always had a theory that banksy would purposefully implode his unsigned print market as one of his 'stunts' pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP.
he wont implode anything, his shareholders wont let him.
makes too much bank from auction sales.
You know...I was thinking about this exact thing the other day..such a blue chip asset, the brand knows in a repeat of a cycle they will be back in the same valued position...do like the recent blue chip stocks and split... I've only realized this can be a possibility when recently an artist I follow decided to take the image of one of his grails and "split" it's value by performing an announced full series of new and different editions with it... Stock splits ,..art stock splits 🤔🤔🤔 i always had a theory that banksy would purposefully implode his unsigned print market as one of his 'stunts' pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP. he wont implode anything, his shareholders wont let him. makes too much bank from auction sales. |
|
coller
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,384
👍🏻 2,371
April 2015
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by coller on Sept 14, 2020 22:45:37 GMT 1, time will tell mr. carter
time will tell mr. carter
|
|
|
|
Pawel
Junior Member
🗨️ 3,798
👍🏻 3,271
June 2015
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Pawel on Sept 14, 2020 22:49:50 GMT 1, i always had a theory that banksy would purposefully implode his unsigned print market as one of his 'stunts' pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP. he wont implode anything, his shareholders wont let him. makes too much bank from auction sales.
i always had a theory that banksy would purposefully implode his unsigned print market as one of his 'stunts' pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP. he wont implode anything, his shareholders wont let him. makes too much bank from auction sales. Poor fella, owned by shareholders Btw, I think you're right |
|
Rubberneck
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,050
👍🏻 1,433
October 2018
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Rubberneck on Sept 14, 2020 22:55:28 GMT 1, i always had a theory that banksy would purposefully implode his unsigned print market as one of his 'stunts' pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP. he wont implode anything, his shareholders wont let him. makes too much bank from auction sales.
i always had a theory that banksy would purposefully implode his unsigned print market as one of his 'stunts' pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP. he wont implode anything, his shareholders wont let him. makes too much bank from auction sales. This was taken when he was discussing it with them... |
|
acaipride
New Member
🗨️ 906
👍🏻 447
April 2020
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by acaipride on Sept 14, 2020 23:35:23 GMT 1, i always had a theory that banksy would purposefully implode his unsigned print market as one of his 'stunts' pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP. he wont implode anything, his shareholders wont let him. makes too much bank from auction sales.
That's what "they" said about Elon when he said that the price of stock was too high, hinting at a split...
i always had a theory that banksy would purposefully implode his unsigned print market as one of his 'stunts' pictured it something like this: banksy's unsigned prints finally reach absurd values, with an unsigned GWRB selling for 250,000 GBP at auction. the next day, banksy releases an open unsigned edition of the GWRB on his website for 250 GBP. he wont implode anything, his shareholders wont let him. makes too much bank from auction sales. That's what "they" said about Elon when he said that the price of stock was too high, hinting at a split... |
|
coller
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,384
👍🏻 2,371
April 2015
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by coller on Sept 14, 2020 23:39:46 GMT 1, FR is probably right. also the inevitable elon/banksy comparison has landed. rip
FR is probably right. also the inevitable elon/banksy comparison has landed. rip
|
|
|
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Rouen Cathedral on Sept 15, 2020 2:57:11 GMT 1, Whomp whomp.
So is GDP still #genius ?
Whomp whomp.
So is GDP still #genius ?
|
|
katzk14
New Member
🗨️ 66
👍🏻 28
August 2020
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by katzk14 on Sept 15, 2020 18:28:19 GMT 1, I wonder if that means open-ended versions of GDP? That's what I'm hoping for, but will be interesting to see what happens!
I wonder if that means open-ended versions of GDP? That's what I'm hoping for, but will be interesting to see what happens!
|
|
brycepen
New Member
🗨️ 477
👍🏻 252
May 2017
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by brycepen on Sept 15, 2020 18:53:39 GMT 1, This ruling pisses me for a lot of reasons, but none more than the fact that Banksy’s “anonymity” was used against him. I guess this means that in order to be able to trademark or copyright your own work, you have to be the kind of t w a t that wants to be famous and has a singular goal of mass producing and selling yourself.
I’m pretty sure basing the decision on Banksy acting in “bad faith” just means they were pissed at the way Banksy blatantly expressed his contempt for the dispute and, consequently, their power as the arbiter of the “rules”. What a load of crap.
This ruling pisses me for a lot of reasons, but none more than the fact that Banksy’s “anonymity” was used against him. I guess this means that in order to be able to trademark or copyright your own work, you have to be the kind of t w a t that wants to be famous and has a singular goal of mass producing and selling yourself.
I’m pretty sure basing the decision on Banksy acting in “bad faith” just means they were pissed at the way Banksy blatantly expressed his contempt for the dispute and, consequently, their power as the arbiter of the “rules”. What a load of crap.
|
|
Rubberneck
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,050
👍🏻 1,433
October 2018
|
Banksy Copyright© & Trademark™, by Rubberneck on Sept 15, 2020 19:56:17 GMT 1, This ruling pisses me for a lot of reasons, but none more than the fact that Banksy’s “anonymity” was used against him. I guess this means that in order to be able to trademark or copyright your own work, you have to be the kind of t w a t that wants to be famous and has a singular goal of mass producing and selling yourself. I’m pretty sure basing the decision on Banksy acting in “bad faith” just means they were pissed at the way Banksy blatantly expressed his contempt for the dispute and, consequently, their power as the arbiter of the “rules”. What a load of crap.
This ruling pisses me for a lot of reasons, but none more than the fact that Banksy’s “anonymity” was used against him. I guess this means that in order to be able to trademark or copyright your own work, you have to be the kind of t w a t that wants to be famous and has a singular goal of mass producing and selling yourself. I’m pretty sure basing the decision on Banksy acting in “bad faith” just means they were pissed at the way Banksy blatantly expressed his contempt for the dispute and, consequently, their power as the arbiter of the “rules”. What a load of crap. Definitely.. hope Banksy does something similar to the wall sections and has a factory churning out the products brandalised having been ripping him off for, pulls the rug from under them raising a fortune for good causes |
|
