Slog
News & ArtsFriday, June 5, 2009
Visual Art What's Fair?
Posted by Jen Graves on Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:10 PM
UPDATE: The whole story, as promised, is here.
A guy wants to open a 30s/40s-gangster-style bar in Fremont. He's been planning it for ages, but gets the inspiration for the name when he sees Jeremy Bert's artwork at McLeod Residence:
The guy decides to call the bar Nine Million Dollars in Unmarked Bills (it's opening June 18 in what was formerly the Triangle Lounge), and commissions his own neon sign with those words, ransom-note-like, but in a different style (upscale, glamorous, all white letters on a rusted-metal background).
On first glance, what's your impression: Does this guy owe the artist anything? What does it depend on for you?
(Remember when this happened with Jack Pierson and Barneys in 2006?)
I'll be back with more details.
Smaller update: Photo by Lele Barnett (she hadn't told me before!)
1
He should just call it Unmarked Bills if he's set on that phrase. The full title he wants is too long. Google returns 17K hits for the exact phrase "million dollars in unmarked bills" so this artist from McLeod certainly isn't the owner of that common phrase. They would have no claim in court from what little I know about the law.
3
Jeremy Bert did not invent light bulbs, lights, ransom-note fonts, or signs. "The guy" has already given the artist credit by disclosing that it is what inspired him. What could he possibly owe him?
5
If he's not aping the logo, of course not. Hell, I work at the Blue Moon. You know how many bars share that name? (Not to mention you've got the burger joint, the healing arts center... )
6
"x million in unmarked bills" is a fairly standard turn of phrase, so I don't think the artist is owed anything. A picture of the bar's neon sign would be helpful - if it resembled the art in any way, of course the story is different, but you seem to think it doesn't.
7
@1, how common the phrase is doesn't matter when it comes to copyright law - you can't copyright words or phrases. Likewise, this wouldn't fall under trademark law, because the artist doesn't use the title as a "mark" to identify his goods or services to the buying public.
It's still a douchy move though.
It's still a douchy move though.
8
He should, at the very least, give the artist a nod, if not a royalty payment. Anthropologie has a long history of doing the same kind of "borrowing," and don't pay the artists who came up with the various installation ideas on the grounds that the pieces aren't copyrighted and "anyone could make them with the right materials," or something like.
A brief google search turned up the following -- apparently Anthropologie has been taken to court under a copyright infringement suit.
http://www.ip-contingency-lawyer.com/200…
A brief google search turned up the following -- apparently Anthropologie has been taken to court under a copyright infringement suit.
http://www.ip-contingency-lawyer.com/200…
9
@7 wrong on both counts, leave law to lawyers ok, i think someone is waiting for you to make them a latte
11
@7 slogbuster @9 is right, you CAN copyright words and phrases (see: threepeat). Further, @7, it is NOT a douchy move, as imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, or some fuckin' thing. As this is an amazingly common turn of phrase, and the idea of something being "inspired by" something else is also amazingly common (see all the movies "inspired by" true events or a book), nothing is owed. But, in a spirit of good will, if anything is owed the artist, I'd say a lifetime of free beers at said bar would do.
12
Perhaps he should commission Jeremy Bert to make the signage. It might be a nice gesture that also gives Bert the ongoing ownership of the visual identity with the very similar phrase. Or maybe this would be too commercial an application for Bert's work.
13
@9: Exactly how is 7 wrong on both counts? Are you a lawyer? Luckier's description matches my understanding of copyright and trademark law, as least as far as we practice it in publishing. Please explain, give a link, or something.
15
@11: "Threepeat" is a trademark, not a copyrighted phrase.
http://answers.google.com/answers/thread…
http://answers.google.com/answers/thread…
17
Leave Nineteen Million Dollars in Unmarked Bills
vs
Nine Million Dollars in Unmarked Bills
only a filthy communist artist with no education about the real world would think that this is deserving of compensation, jeremy bert needs to get a clue about how worthless his contributions to the world really are, that's ok, the rest of us will keep the economy humming while you make your pretty signs and then attempt to charge a brain tax on anyone who looks at it and comes up with similar idea, let us know how that works out you stupid, stupid egotistical artist retard.
18
I wouldn't mind hearing how the artist feels about it. That might sway my thoughts one way or another.
He does give the artist a nod, but does the artist feel they deserve more?
And the argument "Jeremy Bert did not invent light bulbs, lights, ransom-note fonts, or signs." doesn't really fly in the art world. Anytime some asshole says "I coulda done that" the common response is "yeah, but you didn't" and without this artist Dude would not have had the idea and his bar would be named something else entirely with a different artistic theme to the signage.
He does give the artist a nod, but does the artist feel they deserve more?
And the argument "Jeremy Bert did not invent light bulbs, lights, ransom-note fonts, or signs." doesn't really fly in the art world. Anytime some asshole says "I coulda done that" the common response is "yeah, but you didn't" and without this artist Dude would not have had the idea and his bar would be named something else entirely with a different artistic theme to the signage.
20
Psst @13 if you need an IP lawyer, give me a call, because I am an actual IP lawyer. Shhh, don't tell the trolls, 'kay?
21
@13 you way overestimate me, i didn't get a proper education so i could send you "links" or teach you how to use google.
23
I agree with @1. "Unmarked Bills" would be a better name.
"Nine Million in Unmarked Bills" is dumb. Keeping all of those letters working on a neon sign could be enough to drive the place out of business!
"Nine Million in Unmarked Bills" is dumb. Keeping all of those letters working on a neon sign could be enough to drive the place out of business!
27
simon's mad at jack who's mad at barney's who's mad at jeremy who's mad at ballard 30/40-something bar owner.
eh, it's different enough because there are enough other similar works. i'd have to see the actual sign to say for certain... (that's what it depends on for me). can you tell from the sign where it's direct inspiration came from, or does it look like every generic ransom note? is it just that this bar owner is being honest? for now, to me, it seems like an homage, or an idea in the same vein.
eh, it's different enough because there are enough other similar works. i'd have to see the actual sign to say for certain... (that's what it depends on for me). can you tell from the sign where it's direct inspiration came from, or does it look like every generic ransom note? is it just that this bar owner is being honest? for now, to me, it seems like an homage, or an idea in the same vein.
28
BTW, if the sign looks nothing like the original artwork, I don't really see the similarly to the Barneys case. In that instance, weren't they ripping off the visual style of the artist? Using different words but otherwise looking extremely similar? If Barneys had just been using the words from some Jack Pierson work (Despair, Desire) but in an entirely different visual (e.g., no intersection of the words, plain Times New Roman font), would that have been a problem?
29
@ slogbuster-
what exactly do you do to "keep the economy humming along" that allows you to post 5 times in under an hour on a friday morning?
what exactly do you do to "keep the economy humming along" that allows you to post 5 times in under an hour on a friday morning?
30
@21: Next time I need an IP lawyer, I'll find one that knows the difference between copyright and trademark.
@22: Agreed, I could be humbler, but the fact remains that @7 was completely right about the distinction between trademarks and copyrights.
@22: Agreed, I could be humbler, but the fact remains that @7 was completely right about the distinction between trademarks and copyrights.
31
No.
Art inspires creativity. Everything created is inspired by SOMETHING.
Did Jeremy Bert pay the inventors of neon or the designers of Hollywood films in the 30's when he created his art?
Don't think so.
Art inspires creativity. Everything created is inspired by SOMETHING.
Did Jeremy Bert pay the inventors of neon or the designers of Hollywood films in the 30's when he created his art?
Don't think so.
32
@30 ok i will take the bait. you can copyright a work of art. the artist would not get a trademark if it's not used in commerce but the bar owner could never get a trademark either because his proposed trademark would be violating the artists copyright. although in this case the two things are different enough that none of this would possibly matter.
33
i have to say @ slogbuster, that my understanding of copyright & trademark law (which is limited I'll admit) is that 7 was dead on.
and as a designer, having ideas 'borrowed' from you, or finding you have intentionally or not 'borrowed' ideas from others is simply a fact. and i happen to believe that it is a necessary part of the creative world even if there are companies who make more money then they should by ripping off designers. if none of us were allowed to be inspired by one another at all, art & design would suck.
and as a designer, having ideas 'borrowed' from you, or finding you have intentionally or not 'borrowed' ideas from others is simply a fact. and i happen to believe that it is a necessary part of the creative world even if there are companies who make more money then they should by ripping off designers. if none of us were allowed to be inspired by one another at all, art & design would suck.
34
I'm with @1 and @23. Unmarked Bills feels catchier to me, and more subtle. "Nine Million in Unmarked Bills" reminds me of that verbose kid in high school who was kind of clever but mostly annoying.
35
jen's piss-poor quality writing doesn't make it clear whether she's just off speculating on her own, or whether jeremy bert actually believes he should get compensated. so i guess jeremy might not necessarily be pathetic, just a victim of slog destroying his credibility simply by raising the suggestion?
jen please clarify whether we should think jeremy is a douche or you're a douche. thanks
jen please clarify whether we should think jeremy is a douche or you're a douche. thanks
36
@31 Ah, but the point here is that the bar owner would not have thought to put items together the way that he did were it not for the artist. His whole scheme would be something else completely.
However, I still would rather hear from the artist on how they feel about it. Maybe the fact this guy states outright where is inspiration came from is enough.
I mean had he not done that how many people would not even know who the artist was or think to look up their other works.
However, I still would rather hear from the artist on how they feel about it. Maybe the fact this guy states outright where is inspiration came from is enough.
I mean had he not done that how many people would not even know who the artist was or think to look up their other works.
39
Actually Jen Graves clearly never saw the sign. Its a rusted metal sign back lit by neon, (NO VISIBLE NEON),NOT a metal sign with white neon lettering. Yes bert's art is dope but cleary doesn't resemble the sign that has been made.
41
@1 is correct, the best idea is call it Unmarked Bills - they can always do a sign inside where it's spelled out in full.
Oh, and they need a later happy hour so that I can drop in sometimes.
Oh, and they need a later happy hour so that I can drop in sometimes.
43
@31- the artist paid the inventors of neon when he bought the neon used in the artwork. it's the same reason windsor & newton, conte crayons, arches paper or daniel smith don't own the artwork made with thier products.
@37- the outside of a diner is public domain- hopper didn't need to go inside an art gallery for his idea.
The owner of the 30/40s gangster bar should pay the artist for the cost of the artwork, if he was ignorant enough to publicly state that he took the name from the artwork.
The only thing the artist owes anyone is a nod to Nauman.
@37- the outside of a diner is public domain- hopper didn't need to go inside an art gallery for his idea.
The owner of the 30/40s gangster bar should pay the artist for the cost of the artwork, if he was ignorant enough to publicly state that he took the name from the artwork.
The only thing the artist owes anyone is a nod to Nauman.
44
i guess jenn never bothered to talk to the owner of the bar or the artist. the owner of the bar bought the original work.
seriously, jenn... how did you get your job?
seriously, jenn... how did you get your job?
49
Your artwork is cool and kudos to you for inspiring thought. Isn't that was art is for? Hurry and get release from websters on the use of the words in your (recycled from the neon shops junk pile) artwork. Putting a bunch of channel letters together and plugging them in does not give you ownership of the concept and F*ing with these bar peoples potential business for more self promotion is lame. Now I want to go this bar though, thank you.
50
A neon sign isn't the same thing as a crayon or a canvas. The physical presence of the neon IS the art not the medium (which would be gas and metal and whatever else composes a neon sign).
and, the name IS stupid, for a bar...
and, the name IS stupid, for a bar...
51
@42 Go to another spoken word poetry meeting you fuckin hippy. A lot of people find gangster culture fascinating.
As far as the artist goes......
@49 said it best.
As far as the artist goes......
@49 said it best.
52
Yah, Jen'z writing iz sooooo lame, she don't use attributionz, or quotez, or anything to show she spoke to da artist, so how could any intelligent person figure out if she did or din't?
Hope your legal skillz iz better than you're reading comprenshun slogbuster.
Oh, wait. they are both teh same!
eejit.
Hope your legal skillz iz better than you're reading comprenshun slogbuster.
Oh, wait. they are both teh same!
eejit.
55
AND you too @53, she just posted that article. The slog post (with very little info) was from this morning.
57
@50
Neon is absolutely the same as crayon or canvas. Why would any business bother to spell thier name in neon? Because, AS A MEDIUM, it is highly effective in drawing your eyes to it's presence and message. If the neon were the art, there would simply be shapes or designs instead of text.
I agree with you that it's a stupid name for a bar, though.
Neon is absolutely the same as crayon or canvas. Why would any business bother to spell thier name in neon? Because, AS A MEDIUM, it is highly effective in drawing your eyes to it's presence and message. If the neon were the art, there would simply be shapes or designs instead of text.
I agree with you that it's a stupid name for a bar, though.
58
What about the copyright of the original letters used for the McLeod ransom sign in the first place? Were the original designers and artists who designed the font and design given credit?
64
Actually, The Stranger was named for this guy who sold the publisher some weed.
Camus?
He was an afterthought.
Camus?
He was an afterthought.
65
@55, 56
Right, because "I'll be back with more details" means "This is all the information you're getting and there will be no fuller reporting on this," not "Stay tuned for a more thorough story, including reporting."
Fucking halfwits.
Right, because "I'll be back with more details" means "This is all the information you're getting and there will be no fuller reporting on this," not "Stay tuned for a more thorough story, including reporting."
Fucking halfwits.
66
If Will in Seattle makes a point of dropping in, it won't matter what they call it because it'll fail in three weeks anyways.
67
@36 Ah, your point is way off base. It says in the article the owner has been trying to open this bar for years but didn't have a set name. The sign/name worked with his idea it didn't cause it.
68
The bar owner only owes the artist money if the artist owes the movie producers/actors/tv shows/authors money. We take our inspiration where we find it. If this were a direct replica of his work, then we'd call it a rip-off, but it's not.
It's a crappy bar name, nonetheless.
It's a crappy bar name, nonetheless.
69
Jen, this is actually an issue for you? The artist, before the barristeur, selected from the environment. Boring.
70
Who cares, the guy is taking a tired old bar and turning it into something better. Thread complete.
71
An artist's work is essentially their public identity. Would any of you like your face used to promote some trendy theme bar in Fremont without being consulted? What if they changed your name or hair color, but people still recognized you? There may not be much of a legal challenge here, but there is surely an ethical one. This guy just wanted to channel the cool factor from the McLeod Residence into his new venture. To do that, he should have to compensate the original artist in some way.
72
Maybe he can pay him by letting him enjoy the limelight for a minute... ok done. If this was such a blockbuster piece that he (his name) was known for around the world why did it not sell to his army of followers? I would like to see more of his work because i really like this one. And where did he get the inspiration for HIS art? Does he do a lot of kidnappings/ransoms? Maybe was it was a movie or book or some deep emotional torment which began inside him, only to show up in known words, known fonts and a known phrase... as art.
73
I can not believe no one has posted this! I decided to see more of his work and...
Did he pay Miller High Life Beer for this dandy?
http://jbjeartists.com/doc/gal/bert-port…
I'm curious if he actually made the crochet table clothes before he scanned them and applied the graphic finish? Cool shit, but not 100% original.
http://jbjeartists.com/doc/gal/jbje-port…
Maybe his next piece should be giant neon letters that read "hypocrisy" in a font of his own making.
--|| S T O P 4 5 R ||--
Did he pay Miller High Life Beer for this dandy?
http://jbjeartists.com/doc/gal/bert-port…
I'm curious if he actually made the crochet table clothes before he scanned them and applied the graphic finish? Cool shit, but not 100% original.
http://jbjeartists.com/doc/gal/jbje-port…
Maybe his next piece should be giant neon letters that read "hypocrisy" in a font of his own making.
--|| S T O P 4 5 R ||--
74
Im not the most business savvy person in the world but its seems to me a real dumb ass idea to contact a lawyer to see if you can sue someone, talk to the local newspaper about how you're getting ripped off by someone, have it published then ask said person for some money since you can't get it elsewhere. And the Darwin award goes to......
75
The point is the bar owner was inspired by the neon sign and is making his own neon sign. That's copying. Maybe it's legal, but it's a douchey move.
If I'm inspired by a book and write a book but just change the names, etc., I'm still stealing, though I might get away with it.
Changing it just enough to not get sued means you're not just a douche, you're an active douche, which is worse. He should buy Jeremy's sign, since McLeod is no longer using it.
76
Matt, you should read the whole article. The owner of the bar TRIED to buy the sign and was turned away. The book analogy is a good one. Where would the world be if they did make a new Scarface with Tony Montana? We'd be stuck with the 1932 film and a not nearly as entertaining Paul Muni. (and yes I know its a different movie entirely...imagine that different movie exact same name.) Here's to inspiring art, being inspired by art and inspiring others to do inspiring...things.
77
Funny how the Triangle Lounge (Fremont)and the Triangle Pub (Pioneer Square) managed to not sue eachother. Whats the real problem here? Did you need a sensational story Jen?
78
What's fair? Not this! Bert is owed compensation and the bar owner knows it. And by the way, that's some pretty shoddy "journalism" Jen Graves. Calling someone's job ****, particularly in this economy, is just so wrong. Not to mention the fact that I would bet 19 MILLION DOLLARS IN UNMARKED BILLS that Bert makes more than this "reporter" anyway--not that it really matters.
My vote goes to Bert who--by the way to all the brainaics on here--never said he wanted to sue anybody. He deserves some payola for his work, sure as if his face were on that bar sign.
My vote goes to Bert who--by the way to all the brainaics on here--never said he wanted to sue anybody. He deserves some payola for his work, sure as if his face were on that bar sign.
79
Angelita 8, Im one of those brainiacs talking about who's suing who. The two pieces of artwork were sent to an art lawyer in New York who determined there were was "NO CASE FOR INFRINGEMENT". This means the artist talked to a lawyer to see if he could sue. By the way did you see the artists rendition of the Miller Highlife sign where the M was changed to a K otherwise being the exact same sign? Being an artist myself I'd want some recognition for my work buy I would've talked to the bar owner first not a lawyer. And second I'd be real pissed at Mcleod for not selling my artwork.
81
@73... That Killer High Life sign is hilarious, given the discussion that's happening right now about whether someone owes the artist anything for taking inspiration from his work. Why don't we send that piece and a Miller High Life label to that same NY art lawyer and see what he says about that?
82
well, the killer high life is clearly a parody, so we already know those are usually protected. the knit stuff is a good example, though. that stuff clearly looks like work that was created then scanned. did he create it? did he create the pattern? relevant questions. i'm okay with his work there, and with the sign.
but if he mass produced and sold the pottery with the scan to target, and the original creator could clearly recognize their work, that would be a different thing. but he didn't. and the bar owner didn't do what would compare to that either.
it was basically a compliment, from a guy who seems pretty well-meaning. he wasn't trying to steal customers from mcleod or trying to steal the artists thunder. he liked it, and was inspired to make something similar.
that's not so lame. maybe my feelings would change if i met the guy, or if the sign looked too similar. but until then, i think people calling this guy out are being a little harsh, and a little unfair.
but if he mass produced and sold the pottery with the scan to target, and the original creator could clearly recognize their work, that would be a different thing. but he didn't. and the bar owner didn't do what would compare to that either.
it was basically a compliment, from a guy who seems pretty well-meaning. he wasn't trying to steal customers from mcleod or trying to steal the artists thunder. he liked it, and was inspired to make something similar.
that's not so lame. maybe my feelings would change if i met the guy, or if the sign looked too similar. but until then, i think people calling this guy out are being a little harsh, and a little unfair.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (82) RSS