-
-
Re: May 2014 "Pick-Ups" Thread
Dangerzone, those shoes look amazing! Whoever does them has an amazing talent. Who is the artist that does them?Always looking for anything John Flaherty, Drew Storen and Marcell Ozuna game used.
jaeger_danny@yahoo.comComment
-
Re: May 2014 "Pick-Ups" Thread
The artist name is Rob St Clair. Here's a link to his Facebook page if anyone is interested.
And they're aren't illegal shoes. It's a commissioned piece of artwork. They're not sold in stores. The guy does it as a hobby from what I gather. They're 100% done with Sharpie. That's his whole gimmick.Comment
-
Re: May 2014 "Pick-Ups" Thread
Picked up this Jackson Rookie bat from forum member PwKw13. Can't thank Ken enough for a smooth transaction.Comment
-
Re: May 2014 "Pick-Ups" Thread
Unless Mr St Clair received permission from Hillerich & Bradsby, at least one of the images used for the shoes was done so in violation of copyright law. I'd assume none of the images used were done with permission of the copyright owners, so I sustain that they're illegal. I'm not saying the shoes themselves are knockoffs or something similar. I'm saying that the use of copyrighted property without permission of the copyright owner would be deemed illegal. It's a good thing he hasn't chosen to do any images of "Prince" or "The Artist" or "'The Artist,' formerly known as 'Prince'" -- I'm pretty sure he'd be receiving cease and desist notices, in that case.The artist name is Rob St Clair. Here's a link to his Facebook page if anyone is interested.
And they're aren't illegal shoes. It's a commissioned piece of artwork. They're not sold in stores. The guy does it as a hobby from what I gather. They're 100% done with Sharpie. That's his whole gimmick.
Yes, I think the shoes look cool, and if that was done all in Sharpie (the fine point, not the ultra fine) pens, then that's even cooler. However, coolness and cache aside, the issue of copyright remains, regardless.Comment
-
Re: May 2014 "Pick-Ups" Thread
Come to think of it, the Red Sox reproduction would likely be without consent, as well, and therefore also in violation of their trademark rights.Comment
-
Re: May 2014 "Pick-Ups" Thread
So someone can't do a painting of Ted Williams holding an H&B bat, or a painting of a Red Sox logo and give it to someone as a gift without fear of being prosecuted by either company? Even if that may be accurate, who cares? The artist wouldn't care about a cease & desist anyways because these are a complete one-off. I appreciate your point & concern, but I'm not worried. The Sox know how to get a hold of me if they have a problem.Comment
-
Re: May 2014 "Pick-Ups" Thread
That's incorrect... You think Campbell's sued Andy Warhol? Artists can do what they want. Daniel Moore has been sued by Alabama for painting "greatest moments" for years, with logos etc. and selling prints. The university keeps loosing and looking stupid.
Thanks,
Jimmy
Email:
jamesbrandt24 at yahoo.comComment
-
Re: May 2014 "Pick-Ups" Thread
For the H&B part of it, that's not the point. For the Red Sox one, I believe they could be prosecuted, but the Red Sox would be unlikely to do so unless the individual started making more than their attorney fees would be in pursuing the case.
Back to the H&B issue. The problem is that the image of DiMaggio kissing the bat is from the H&B archives. H&B (and possibly the photographer, as well) have a right to claim theft of intellectual property.
Theft is theft. Stealing someone's work and profiting from it would be no different than stealing someone's collection and selling it. I don't think it's a "bs nonfactor," as you've chosen to name it.Comment
-
Re: May 2014 "Pick-Ups" Thread
I have a Red Sox tattoo on my wrist... do you think the Sox will drag my tattoo artist into court? No. And yes, this is a place to discuss neat pick-ups & things like that. If you wanna discuss copyrights, maybe we should start a new thread. Interesting convo.Comment
Tweet
Comment