Jan 27, 2011
Jeff koons sues over balloon dog.
koons is going after two businesses that his lawyers say have violated his intellectual property rights by producing and selling bookends that resemble his famous “balloon dog” sculpture,
the defendants say theirs are not a copy. what do you think ?
fyi “balloon dog” bookends, sells in a san francisco gallery for $30 each. koon’s smaller dogs on sale
on ebay for $7,250 to $12,500.
3 comments ↓
Jeff can lick his balls, literally
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Incredible Things, Angel Ceballos. Angel Ceballos said: Jeff koons sues over balloon dog. http://bit.ly/eTNRqj / #webdesign #design [...]
It’s not a copy, it may have been ‘inspired/motivated’ by the original, but the scope (size) is what I believe makes the Koons piece (as does proportion/color/etc). One can not own an idea and the expression is open to interpretation. Can the expression of this (an) idea be defined by the translucent metallic-ish color, the grandeur, or the balloon like curves the Koons piece exhibits? Save a general similarity to sculpture/twist balloons, the bookends exhibit none of these. What is the purpose of art, the Koons original is large scale art, the bookends don’t manifest the same emotional values. My friend and great artist /photographer Jim Krantz had a number of pieces that he shot for Marlboro, these were copied (exactly) blown up and sold some (at the time) for the highest price ever commanded for a modern photograph of over $300K . by the artist Richard Prince. Appropriation is (almost) a completely different animal in the art world (I personally don’t think this is what this is about). Better than what I could say in even 1000 words please review these links which address the concerns and ideas surrounding these issues. You draw the conclusion(s) yourself, it’s not a science (doesn’t follow the laws of nature), and is driven by whims, predispositions, and our own beliefs. Take your time and review these articles they’re worth their weight in a semesters tuition in art and intellectual property;
BTW, this is not the first time Koons has been involved with an appropriation/intellectual property case, the 1st link from 1992 he argued the other side and lost
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_v._Koons
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/arts/design/06prin.html
http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2010/01/06/jim-krantz-may-have-finally-gotten-his-attribution/
a very interesting lecture regarding these issues and concerns: http://www.ted.com/talks/johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture.html
let me know your thoughts
Leave a Comment
Alas, yes we moderate comments. Please proceed to add value.