/* ---- Google Analytics Code Below */

Tuesday, February 14, 2023

NFT's and Art Definition in Court

Where will this lead?  Definition fading?   Not even artistically relevant?  Investment Caution.


Jury Rules that NFTs Aren't Really Art   By Futurism, February 13, 2023

This case seems to boil down to one of the most well-known fashion houses in the world enforcing its ownership of its brand.

In the past year, the NFT market has plummeted even worse than the cryptocurrency market.

A new legal precedent just dropped in the case of Hermès versus Mason Rothschild, a self-described "conceptual artist" who used the company's iconic Birkin bags as a backdrop for his "MetaBirkins" non-fungible token (NFT) collection.

As the New York Times reports, Hèrmes won its lawsuit against the 28-year-old artist after he sold NFTs that featured the legendary handbag with all kinds of strange overlays, from a clear version that had a fetus edited into it to a fuzzy-handled one that had mammoth tusks.

A nine-person federal jury in Manhattan ruled this week that in spite of Rothschild's insistent cries of protected artistic expression, he had nevertheless infringed upon Hèrmes' copyright — and failed to meet a legal test used to determine what is and isn't art, too.

Using the Rogers test – named after the actress Ginger Rogers, who in 1989 sued filmmaker Alberto Grimaldi for using her trademarked name in the film "Ginger and Fred," only to have a jury rule that the filmmaker's use of her name was "artistically relevant" — the jurors in the "MetaBirkins" case determined that Rothschild's NFTs didn't meet that standard.

From Futurism

View Full Article    

No comments: