General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDoes Nike actually have a case against the "Satan Shoe" company?
Aren't you allowed to buy stuff and then paint or modify it and then sell it again? Any legal scholars here have an opinion?
torius
(1,652 posts)I forget the name, the big co. sued the desigber who modified and the big co won but years later teamed up with the modifier. its not legal to modify and resell brands.
FalloutShelter
(11,878 posts)If you use a protected logo in or on your work, you need a lawyer to confirm consent and attribution.
If that did not happen, Nike has a case.
LisaM
(27,830 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 1, 2021, 07:52 AM - Edit history (1)
Among.othwr things, they mass produced the infringing shoes. I can't believe Lil Nas doesn't have better attorneys, unless he's relying on public ill will against Nike to do this. Heck, I boycott Nike and I don't think this is right.
https://amp-cnn-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/29/business/satan-shoes-nike-lil-nas-x/index.html?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16171287906318&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2021%2F03%2F29%2Fbusiness%2Fsatan-shoes-nike-lil-nas-x%2Findex.html
soothsayer
(38,601 posts)msongs
(67,441 posts)Celerity
(43,497 posts)Very, very few people will ever own a $1,000 blood-and-pentagram sneaker. If the case goes to trial, though, theres more than a limited-edition satanic shoe line at stake. The case has potentially broad implications because were seeing a rise in this kind of customization of branded goods as well as upcycling, Roberts told The Verge via email.
Its fine to directly resell products, Roberts says, and its legal to advertise goods while mentioning somebody elses trademark. You can also do things like dismember Barbie dolls and sell pictures of them as art. But what about the businesses making jewelry out of authentic Chanel buttons, or cutting fringes into genuine Vuitton bags? Earlier this year, in fact, Chanel sued a company for misappropriating its brand for recycled button earrings.
Basically, MSCHF bought shoes that it could legally resell using Nikes branding, but it heavily modified them into whats arguably a new product whose quality Nike cant control, then sold them as a commercial good rather than a traditional art piece. Depending on how a court weighs all those factors, it could create a precedent for future cases. I think other high fashion brands will be keeping a close eye on this case, Roberts says.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/29/22357225/nike-sues-lil-nas-x-unauthorized-satan-shoes-mschf
LisaM
(27,830 posts)I work in trademarks, this is really interesting to me.