6 ms·
Florence museum won suit against publisher that used Michelangelo's David image
- rnewme 3y ago[flagged]
- stickfigure 3y agoMultinational corporations are going to have it rough in the future, as governments with competing (and sometimes contradictory) interests discover they have the ability to punish corporate behavior anywhere in the world. China is leading the way here.
- ytdytvhxgydvhh 3y agoItaly seems to be right there too. Just saw they deemed a car model name illegal because it sounds Italian but isn’t made in Italy: https://www.thedrive.com/news/italy-tells-alfa-romeo-its-illegal-to-build-the-milano-in-poland https://www.thedrive.com/news/italy-tells-alfa-romeo-its-ill...
- Perepiska 3y agoAlso Italien: make liquorice candies named "Fjord" [1] :) [1] https://www.liking.it/en/products/candies/hard/balsamic-fjord/ https://www.liking.it/en/products/candies/hard/balsamic-fjor...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mauvehaus 3y agoWait 'til they hear about the Pepperidge Farm cookies.
- afiori 3y agoNone of those words sounds even vaguely italian
- Brian_K_White 3y agoThe single most famous one is Milano, and there is also Verona.
- afiori 3y agoSo Milano and Verona are products in the Pepperidge Farm brand? I was not familiar with the brand or their product naming
- playingalong 3y agoIt'd be legal to produce it in Italy outside of the city of Milan. But it's illegal to produce it abroad. I don't think they even pretend it's not protectionism.
- Affric 3y agoYeah… the Italian badge has to produce the Milano in Italy… absolutely crazy. Marketing guys who want to sell a Polish car should not be able to use the cultural cache built by Italy to do it.
- pyottdes 3y agoWhat are your feelings about the Ferrari California?
- Affric 3y agoGreat car. Similar feelings.
- evantbyrne 3y agoIt's going to take a bit more persuasion to get auto manufacturers to move to an entirely different state than silly rules around names. And while the Italian government fixates on the past, the rest of the world is hooked straight up to the fire hose of American culture, which is to the benefit of Americans.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> while the Italian government fixates on the past, the rest of the world is hooked straight up to the fire hose of American culture Much of modern Italian culture has direct roots in its post-War boom, with substantial portions having been grafted from Americana, e.g. pannetone, parmesan, tiramisu and quite a few "classic" pasta dishes like carbonara [1]. [1] https://www.ft.com/content/6ac009d5-dbfd-4a86-839e-28bb44b2b64c https://www.ft.com/content/6ac009d5-dbfd-4a86-839e-28bb44b2b...
- Affric 3y agoThat is a great article on the invention of tradition in Italian cuisine, rightwing politics, the fallibility of popular memory, and the realities of prewar life in Europe. It does not state that pannetone, parmesan, tiramasu, or 'quite a few "classic" dishes' are Americana. According to the article pizzerias as a phenomenon are American. The most traditional Parmesan is American. Carbonara was an American innovation or at least arose due to American ingredients.
- ISL 3y agoIt leads to balkanization -- see Google's total withdrawal from China. As a consumer, I recently selected a new device in large part because its cloud-affiliated software (and bespoke operating system) was written, stored, and administered in countries with appropriate and ethical legal frameworks. The competition was more feature-complete, but I concluded that I couldn't trust any of those options.
- alsetmusic 3y agoSeems more and more that to lead a completely ethical existence means sacrificing luxury, happiness, and time. Or surrender to willful ignorance.
- lostlogin 3y ago> to lead a completely ethical existence means sacrificing luxury, happiness, and time Hasn’t this always been true? It’s also getting increasingly easy to buy things that meet ethical standards (or more cynically, it’s easier to buy things that meet some low bar that someone setup).
- fsckboy 3y ago> It leads to balkanization -- see Google's total withdrawal from China. True balkanization does not occur in Italy, except Trieste and perhaps parts of Friuli-Venezia Giulia... and I put that in Italics!
- ApolloFortyNine 3y agoI feel like EU is ahead of the curve here with cookie pop-ups. In order to comply don't you have to go out of your way to block EU viewers? At least that's how it seems to be handled by ones that care, la times I believe was one example. And I know some of their other policies specifically call out fining based on global revenue, not EU revenue.
- stickfigure 3y agoAt some point, people will realize that companies without a physical EU footprint can just ignore it. Has anyone _ever_ been extradited over cookie banners?
- ApolloFortyNine 3y agoThe "problem" is that you could get on a list to be denied entry at the border if you ever choose to travel.
- stickfigure 3y agoWho? The CEO? I like European travel more than most, but there's definitely a price you could pay me to give that up. LatAm is wonderful too.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lolinder 3y agoIn order to be able to use these public domain works without paying licensing fees, would a company have to just not do business in Italy or would they have to pull out of the EU entirely?
- Nemo_bis 3y agoThe court of Venice claimed world-wide jurisdiction. A German court fought back. https://web.archive.org/web/20240410141158/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/10/world/europe/vitruvian-man-puzzle-leonardo-da-vinci-ravensburger.html https://web.archive.org/web/20240410141158/https://www.nytim...
- greatgib 3y agoBoth this law usage and the reason of complaint from the museum are so stupid. And I'm not usually supporting big company using public goods but in that case I think that it was legitimate
- xoa 3y ago>And I'm not usually supporting big company using public goods Do you mind if I ask why? I don't see why the size of the entity should matter one bit when it comes to the public domain and human history, nor why some other entity should, even in principle, get a permanent monopoly on artistic expression they played zero role in (or for that matter their polity played zero role in). The physical objects themselves of history are of course by definition limited and necessarily require custodianship and care. But the ideas and imagery they expressed centuries or millennia ago should have long since passed to all of humanity, all of us from the smallest to the largest. It being locked down retroactively is even worse. It's not as if a "big company" using the public domain in any way diminishes anyone else's ability to do so nor the original work.
- pedja 3y ago> It's not as if a "big company" using the public domain in any way diminishes anyone else's ability to do so nor the original work. Not OP, but big companies tend to abuse public goods after they use them. Think of all the DMCA takedown notices that these companies made for people playing classical music.
- not_your_mentat 3y agoThis is strange conflicted space for me. Were this the case, Disney would have had to produce nothing but original work, which would probably benefit us today but would leave us without the eventual cultural heritage that they produced (if it can ever be pulled from their claws). I'm coming more and more to the conclusion that public domain is very much like other idealogical freedoms I was raised to believe in, which is to say beautiful conceptually but possibly messy and requiring potentially painful sacrifices on the part of individuals if consistency with the ideal is the goal.
- eviks 3y agoDoes the museum have permission from David?
- fsckboy 3y agoActually, it's not even David; we know that David, King of Israel, was circumcised, and Michelangelo's David is not. (What some Italian was thinking of, recycling a Hebrew King into inauthentic art sold for profit on commission, is still quite sus, but them claiming ownership of it is beyond the pale.)
- angiosperm 3y agoTechnically, to have been circumcised, King David would first need to have existed. However, even without existing, notional David could be described as having been circumcised. Presenting an image uncircumcised, as Michelangelo did, then ought to suffice to, er, sever any proprietary claim, as it cannot then be the same notional David, but another unspecified stand-in David, perhaps akin to the popularly blond and blue-eyed stand-in Jesus. Jesus, by the way, is described in Paul as having been constructed, after the manner of Adam and of saved souls' post-resurrection bodies (even now awaiting them in heaven against the fore-ordained apocalypse), from aforesaid David's (implied captured and preserved, or allegorical) "seed". This too does not require actual existence. The waiting bodies, notional or manifest, canonically lack anything for foreskins to be attached to or severed from, perhaps a mercy, and presumably navels as well. No forecast is made about nose hair, either way. Jesus, in contrast, as a fertility totem is necessarily endowed. Who would essay to circumcise Him is an open question; theologically, He doesn't seem to need it.
- Karellen 3y agoRights are generally granted to the creator of a work of art (painter, photographer, sculptor, etc...), rather than its subject. However, given that there will probably be some difficultly in tracking down the subject's model release paperwork, your concerns are likely also valid :-)
- olliej 3y ago
- beej71 3y agoPublic domain with license fees? What kind of crazy public domain is this?
- andy99 3y agoIt's about the precedent. Without protections like this, it's pretty hard to imagine creators being incentivized to produce new work.
- ok_dad 3y agoYea Michelangelo hasn’t produced in a while now probably due to motivation, it’s hard out there for an artist who is just trying to break into the scene.
- HenryBemis 3y agoI believe that it's more about protecting the image of the artwork. Imagine using the statue to promote product X. Then imagine that every icon/building/etc. being used to promote something that you/the nation goes against (i.e. the statue in the cover of a porn magazine, or a historical monument to promote the latest crypto-fraud-coin. I understand that the Colosseum, the Acropolis, or the statue of David won't be physically damaged by such an ad, but still..
- darby_eight 3y agoYou're describing a more restrictive version of a trademark. Why don't they call it such?
- int_19h 3y agoAnd why does some modern nation that didn't even exist back when these works were created gets to claim this kind of right on them?
- atmosx 3y agoMaybe he not that good after all. Sculpting is not for everyone.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- primitivesuave 3y agoAt the end of the article it points out that a foreign toy company was successfully sued for making a puzzle from Leonardo da Vinci's Vitruvian Man. I'm curious what enforcement authority the Italians have over a German company, if any. The court ruling is effectively saying that the historical IP of the Italian peninsula belongs to whichever Italian museum happens to have the original artifact in their possession, but would a German or EU court uphold this?
- Affric 3y agoItalian peninsula? Also it’s not conincidental that David is in La Galleria dell’Accademia di Firenze. It was moved there from its highly symbolic place at the Piazza della Signoria in part due to political implications. Copyright law in Italy comes with moral rights.
- nilamo 3y agoI'm not sure this answered the question. The company is based in Germany. Can they not just ignore the Italian ruling, since they're not in Italy?
- alecrim8849 3y agoNot necessarily, i'm not an expert in EU law, but being in the EU they may be forced to recognize the italian ruling, according to the Brussel I Regulation [1]. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_I_Regulation_2012 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_I_Regulation_2012
- Retric 3y agoNormally it would be courts of wherever the defendant lives deciding the issue: “European Union (EU) law determines which courts of which Member States should hear the case, to avoid conflicting decisions. The general rule is that a person should be sued in the State where s/he is domiciled. Furthermore, other jurisdictional rules may be invoked as alternative in specific cases, for example, the person failing in performance of the contract can be sued at the place of performance of the obligation in question (e.g., in the place where the purchased goods should have been delivered). Special rules exist to protect groups such as consumers, workers and insured persons.” https://e-justice.europa.eu/85/EN/which_country_s_court_is_responsible https://e-justice.europa.eu/85/EN/which_country_s_court_is_r... So seemingly Italian courts shouldn’t have jurisdiction.
- bawolff 3y agoOne of the few areas where USA copyright law is more sane than many other countries.
- 255kb 3y agoMickey Mouse is laughing at your comment :)
- nomagicbullet 3y ago> In a statement, the museum claimed that by “insidiously and maliciously [juxtaposing] the image of Michelangelo’s David with that of a model,” the publisher was “debasing, obfuscating, mortifying, and humiliating the high symbolic and identity value of the work of art and subjugating it for advertising and editorial promotion purposes.”
- karaterobot 3y agoI know I am missing something. The article says they superimposed a model's head over David's body, and what I imagined was the statue with a Photoshop of someone else's head on it. Instead, what I see in the image included in the article is an entirely different head and body. Only the pose is the same. I suppose there must be some different image, not shown, that is the actual subject of the suit, as this one is clearly not infringing any conceivable copyright. The other alternative, too insane to consider, is that they can somehow copyright a pose. Obviously I'm just confused, but I don't get it.
- 627467 3y ago> The case hinged on article nine of Italy’s constitution, which protects symbols of the nation’s cultural identity and historical memory. A related law allows the country’s public institutions to request concession fees for commercial reproductions of artworks of cultural heritage, regardless of their copyright status Lots of discussions here on copyright but the ruling doesn't seems to have anything to do with copyright per se. Also, playing devil's advocate here: agree or not (I don't) is not uncommon for portrails of cultural/historical symbols to be regulated, just look at the ban of nazi symbolism in - Germany (Italy also bans them, but not - finland for example).
- Dylan16807 3y agoHaving to pay the particular museum pushes this beyond that kind of general regulation.
- 627467 3y agoWhy? Seems like a perfectly fine way to pay for upkeep of museums, particularly in this case since these are public institutions.
- Dylan16807 3y ago> Why? Because that method makes it act more like permanent single ownership than something cultural. > Seems like a perfectly fine way to pay for upkeep of museums, particularly in this case since these are public institutions. Whether the result is good is different from how far it's pushing, and I think the result sounds like it has the potential to be helpful. But I don't like how closely it ties revenue to the popularity of each museum's specific artifacts, since these are public institutions.
- opello 3y ago> Seems like a perfectly fine way to pay for upkeep of museums, particularly in this case since these are public institutions. If it's culturally valuable then the members of that cultural group can (probably happily) pay for that upkeep? Presumably covering some shortage if tourism doesn't satisfy the base need to keep the artifacts intact?
- Daub 3y agoI had some experience writing a book that featured many images of paintings by long dead artists. The copyright issue was not the art, but the photos, which were frequently owned by a museum. From my experience, these museums were very difficult to work with, charging exorbitant fees and very slow to respond to requests.
- albert_e 3y agoIf someone makes a cartoon or modified illustration of the Statue of Liberty ... would the USA (or the Port Authority or the Liberty-Ellis Island foundation) have grounds to sue and claim compensation? A million transgressions are waiting to be brought to justice, and a dozen a day are being added to the pipeline.
- db48x 3y agoWouldn’t that be a Florentine museum?
- justinclift 3y agoSeems to be at odds with this recent UK court ruling, also about images of long-out-of-copyright works: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38817128 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38817128 It'll be interesting to see where this ends up when the various countries courts issue collection notices against each other.
- crisply5706 3y ago[flagged]