Family Of Dead Artist Upset By Publicity From Google
from the maybe-they-should-form-a-club-with-the-newspapers dept
Most people probably didn't wake up this morning intending to read about or look at the work of Spanish artist Joan Miro. But, if they saw Google's Miro-inspired logo today, commemorating the artist's birthday, their interest may have been piqued. None of this free publicity seems to be sitting well with the late artist's family, as they've demanded that Google take down the logo, citing copyright violation. Of course, the logo didn't actually use any of Miro's work; it only paid homage to his style. Certainly, the family can't claim a copyright on Miro's style. If they could, the entire art world would collapse, since almost everything is heavily influenced by the work of others. Google, probably wisely, took down the logo, which only would have run a few more hours. Stories about patents stifling innovation have become pretty common. It's unfortunate that some are abusing the copyright system to prevent the world from being a more beautiful, visually interesting place.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Ive never been a fan of Miro's stuff...
Especialy as it was celebrating the artist and couldn't really be percieved as devaluing his work...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WTF
"I represent an artist and I don't want you giving the artist any free publicity."
How was Google profiting from the image? Did people all of the sudden start using Google because the Miro art work in the logo? Did Google just make $1,000,000 off of adds on their home page?
Sad is all I can say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
seems hypersensitive
By analogy, Charles M. Schulz had a clause written into his contract that nobody could legally create cartoons using Peanuts characters after his death. The thought probably made him sick to his stomach. Although I found the Google/Miro logo tasteful and entertaining, I'm sure the family had the opposite reaction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OxyMORON
What a society of crybaby-morons we have belched up from our bowels. Grrrrrr!
Someone call my lawyer! I got a paper-cut on my lip when I licked the evelope to my complaint letter to Disney for the fact they needlessly killed "Old Yeller!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Miro
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Thanks for the laugh :)
I may not know much about art (but I know what I like), but as far as I can tell the Google logo was a completely original work which at worst may have been derived from small elements of Joan Miró's art.
This just smacks of the overzealous racketeering which is generally known as "The Estate of..." You all remember that Simpsons episode where Grampa's dinner table antics with some spuds and forks are quickly quashed with the help of a soulless, humourless lawyer representing The Estate of Charles Chaplin and a pair of hired goons? Yeah...
What was particularly resonant about this scene was the fact that Chaplin was a keen observer of the evils wrought by systems which fell out of the control of the people. To take the two most famous examples... Modern Times depicts the dehumanisation of industrialisation - where some manager on a decent wage gets to dictate every move of men who aren't compensated nearly as well. The Great Dictator was made at a time when the US sought no involvement in WW2. It exposed the death of the individual that went hand in hand with fascism and it featured one of the greatest motivating speeches I've ever heard in a movie - This is no Bill Pullman in Independence Day - it's actually compelling and moving. If you want to hear it you'll just have to check it out for yourself :)
I know little of Joan Miró but a little research suggests his work stems from a similar spirit of freedom and humanism - for example, shunning categorisation seemed to lead to a greater range of expression in his body of work.
What "I represent The Estate of..." has to do with the spirit and physical presence of either men's work is beyond my understanding.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
...I mean, I'm not really that passionate about Charlie Chaplin's work and I still have no idea what Miró's art is supposed to represent :)
I guess this crap is my version of "I love you, maaan!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Take that link out!
*sigh*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Miro Miro on the wall
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Miro Miro on the wall
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Miro Miro on the wall
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Exposure
One thing that bothers me about copyright infringement claims is that even for mash-ups and derivative works or inspired works people make such a big deal. Well, it is difficult to draw the lines. In any case, I think that the logo was tastefully done - and it was mainly inspired not really copied per se.
Hmmm. One could argue that they're yelling for publicity.
Then again, the thing with law is that there are different interpretations and that could be quite problematic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wow..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Holier than thou...
It's pretty obvious most of the respondants to this post never even heard of the guy...that should be enough to make his heirs thankful for the publicity.
Damn, if Google honored me like that, I'd be thanking them...it's sort of like Opra saying she loved a book.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
stupid miros
stupid people plain and simple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Complaining in a grab for more publicity? Absolute
Additional publicity? Why do you think they waited till the day was almost over? Run the ad for ~24 hours, then grab headlines with a cease-and-desist for 24 more! Step 4: PROFIT!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bloodsucking scum
I think it's sad that when someone (in this instance, Google), makes an attempt to remember/celebrate someone's life, that there are oftentimes those who simply see their "loved one's" death in terms of potential dollars earned. I say f**k those who cry "copyright! [give me money!] copyright! [give me money!]".
I'm off to make a Miro Tribute site...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You just can't chose your relatives, can you?
As for the other side of the coin, I never heard of Miró before. The Google logo inspired me to learn more about him, and voila, I've found out that the Woman and Bird statue in Barcelona - which I know and - is Miró's work!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alternative options for the 20th of April?
I think not....
I thought that the Google interpretation was extremely well done. They should not have removed it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Publicity
I found the logo interesting but now that I know his name I will probably check out his work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
homage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Miro
Why doesn't Google commission a contemporary artist to paint something reverently referencing Miro? Google is too cheap, lazy, and insensitive to do something like that.
Miro's reputation was established long ago. To suggest that Miro somehow needs Google is simply stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
>that by Google using this artist's
>style in the creation of their logo
>and then linking to Joan Miro's pages -
>it could give the impression to many
>others that Google was indorsing Joan
>Miro's work... or that Joan Miro was
>endorsing Google.
Are you stupid or just naive. That's not even a reasonable stretch of this situation. This is clearly a case of Google honoring the life of another and their greedy selfish family getting upset. Google seems to care more about the achievements of this man than the artists family.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let them sue
where he belongs.
Maybe next year Google will honor stoners and their "420" myth. Duuuude!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
miro
[ link to this | view in chronology ]