Louis Vuitton Doesn’t Hate Darfur, Just Copyright Infringement
Pretty darn similar.Photo: Nadiaplesner.com, Courtesy of Louis Vuitton
The Louis Vuitton vs. Nadia Plesner battle is heating up, with the Danish art student questioning what can be considered art and the house of Marc trying to not seem like the bad guys while protecting their copyrights.
New York Magazine offered and insightful look at the lawsuit and how Louis was only taking the most logical step after dealing with an artist that refused to cease and desist. It’s one for the textbooks and will most likely prevent other artists from messing with the Vuitton’s of the world any time soon. The full story below…
Earlier this week we ran a Q&A with Nadia Plesner, the Danish art student embroiled in a copyright lawsuit with Louis Vuitton. She created an image depicting a Darfurian child holding a bag based on a Louis Vuitton design for a campaign to raise awareness of the ongoing genocide in Darfur. Her message is that we care more about items like the Vuitton purse and the celebrities that carry them than serious issues like Darfur. Today a spokeswoman from Louis Vuitton rang us up to offer their side of the story.
She said the fashion house initially did not ask for damages when it noticed the colors and design of the bag in Plesner’s painting appeared to be an exact copy of the Audra bag pictured above. They sent Plesner a letter asking her to respect the rights of other artists like Louis Vuitton creative director Marc Jacobs and artist Takashi Murakami, who designed the bag. Plesner didn’t respond to the letter but continued her campaign and posted the letter on her Website. The spokeswoman also noted when Plesner started the campaign, she was donating 30 percent of the profits from the sale of T-shirts and posters with the image (now her Website says she’s donating 100 percent of the profits).
Since Plesner didn’t respond to Louis Vuitton, the house went to court in Paris to file an injunction. On March 25 the court declared the image was a clear infringement of Louis Vuitton’s copyright on the bag and ordered Plesner to cease and desist. When Plesner ignored this injunction, Louis Vuitton took further action and asked for 5,000 euros for each day she continued to sell the product (just under $7,700; some erroneous reports say $20,000 a day). “If companies don’t take action to protect trademarks, it’s harder to do so in the future,” the spokeswoman said. “I just think the way she’s portraying this she’s not telling what Louis Vuitton did to prevent the lawsuit.”
She added Louis Vuitton is not trying to stop Plesner’s campaign and hopes to find a solution to allow it to continue without infringing on Louis Vuitton’s intellectual-property rights.
disagree-/agree+
About the Author: Founder and main dude at Fashion Indie, Daniel Saynt began his career in fashion at the tender age of 14, when he worked in the stockroom for some unnamed fashion whorehouse. His distaste for the mainstream quickly festered until he decided enough was enough, denouncing all mainstream fashion lines (unless the stuffs on sale or just down right irresistible or free, you can't say no to free).
attorneyatlaw | May 17, 2008 | Reply
A cease and desist order does mean that Louis Vuitton attempted to prevent the lawsuit. For Fashion Indie and/or New York Magazine to even attempt to take the side of this conglomerate makes Fashion Indie just as foolish as Louis Vuitton. As a copyright attorney I can guarantee you that LVMH has no way to win this case. The Warhol Foundation are now representing this young woman and they have more than enough money to take on the lawyers of Vuitton.
If Louis Vuitton has any sense they will cut a big fat check to the nearest Darfur related charity and write it off as a taxable donation. All it takes is one simple Google search to see where public opinion falls on this case - on the side of the artist - which as we know, is very rare. Shame on Fashion Indie (who should officially change its name to - Fashion Kiss Ass) and whomever was “paid” or given a free Louis Vuitton bag over at New York Magazine to write this ridiculous article/post.
callmemrsmortimer | May 19, 2008 | Reply
attorneyatlaw i agree with you 100%. shame on ny mag and fashion-indie (how soon “indie” changes to “status-quo”) and double-shame on louis vuitton. i have placed all of my LV bags on ebay due to this and have encouraged my friends to do the same. as a proud member of the fortunate 1%, i believe it is time for lvmh to rethink the way they approach luxury - mainly, people and the planet first.
Daniel Saynt | May 20, 2008 | Reply
We were just reporting on what New York Magazine ran. We aren’t really taking sides on this one cause A.) We are all for copyright protection and B.) We Believe in Artistic Freedom.
If I received a cease and desist, I would most likely stop what I was doing or prepare for a lawsuit. The lawsuit was Louis final option here.