A while back I purchased a Takashi Murakami print at his Brooklyn Museum Exhibition. You can see that post here. I’ve come to recently learn that a lawsuit is brewing over these art pieces that were done.
以前、ブルックリンミュージアムでの展示会で、村上隆のプリントを購入しました。このブログで見られます。こちらの作品に訴訟事件が起きていることを最近知りました。
(From NY Magニューヨークマガジンから)
Clint Arthur spent $12,000 on two Takashi Murakami prints at the special Louis Vuitton boutique inside the Murakami exhibit at L.A.’s Museum of Contemporary Art. At the time, he did not know that those prints merely consisted of the same material used to make the special handbags Murakami created for Louis Vuitton, which were also for sale. You know, purse scraps. So Arthur is taking Vuitton to court for fraud. He alleges that Vuitton did not disclose that the prints were made from scraps and had full intent to deceive their customers. Because who would drop $6,000 on them if they knew? Especially when the handbags being sold right next to them — which require considerably more craftsmanship to create — were selling for just $1,000.
Arthur sued Vuitton last June. Vuitton has offered Arthur his money back, plus interest for the prints, but Arthur refused it. He’s on a die-hard mission to rid the world of art scams. LV says they labeled the prints as “revisited,” which means the artist has gone back and done something extra to the work. BUT, Murakami did not revisit the handbag scraps.
If Arthur wins, Vuitton could have to fork over $12 million. But fear not for their piggy bank — they can easily pay for that with winnings from past trademark-infringement cases. They won $30.5 million alone in a landmark lawsuit against eBay last year. I’m definitely looking forward to the outcome.
Clint Arthur氏はロサンゼルスの近代美術館で行われた村上隆の展覧会の中で開かれたLouis Vuittonの特別ブティックで、村上のプリント2点を$12,000で購入しました。当時、彼はそのプリントが同時に販売されていた、村上隆がLouis Vuittonのために特別に作ったハンドバックと同じ素材でできていたことを知らなかった。そう、バッグの切れ端ということ。なので、Arthur氏はヴィトンを詐欺容疑で告訴しています。彼はヴィトンがこのプリントが切れ端で作られていることを隠し、消費者を欺いたと主張しています。だって、知っていたら$6,000も払うわけがない。しかも、隣で売られていたハンドバッグ−作るのにはるかに技術が必要なもの−がたったの$1,000で売られていたのだから。
Arthur氏はVuittonを去年の6月に告訴しました。VuittonはArthur氏に返金と、プリントに利子までオファーしましたが、Arthurは断りました。彼はアート詐欺をこの世から無くすための徹底的な任務を負っています。LVはプリントに「revisited（再訪）」というレベルをはりました。つまり、アーティストがその作品にもう一度、手を加えたということ。でも、村上隆はそのバッグの切れ端に再訪はしませんでした。
もし、Arthur氏が勝てば、Vuittonは1200万ドルも支払うことになります。ただ、彼らの貯金箱を心配する必要はありません−過去のロゴ乱用や侵害訴訟で勝訴したお金で余裕で払えます。去年、eBayを相手取った巨大な訴訟で3050万ドルも勝ち取ったのです。この結末が気になります。
TRUTH 1585.
NIKE FRANCHISE MAG.
STAPLE X KID ROBOT.
STAPLE X TIMBERLAND.
STAPLE DESIGN CASE STUDIES.
THE 1-2-1 INTERVIEW SERIES.
STAPLE SPRING 2012.
STAPLE: 3 DAYS IN THE LIFE.
STAPLE X ADFUNTURE BELLATOR COLUMBIDAE.
STAPLE: VISIONS OF VISIONARIES.
INFLUENCERS DOCUMENTARY.
STAPLE: BRAND RMX.
HARLEM CHILDREN ZONE.
THE SKETCHBOOK.
GYT CAMPAIGN.
HELP JAPAN.
REDU HOMEROOM.
REED PAGES MAGAZINE.
About Us
STAPLE APPAREL COLLECTION
SHOP LOCATOR
Categories
Archives
Instagrams
April 28th, 2009 / 16:03:00
LOUIS VUITTON ART.
One Response to “LOUIS VUITTON ART.”
Leave a Reply
Reed Space
REED EVENTS
REED COLABS
Who would have known they were scraps. The art pieces aren’t like damaged goods. I would have asked for a special art piece to be made instead, now that would be a one of a kind.