Davin Risk
Since 2002
Works in Toronto Canada

Discussions (1) Opportunities (0) Events (0) Jobs (0)

Re: Why doesn't Nike want to play with me?

Shouldn't this meet the basic legal definition of satire? As far as my
legally simplistic knowledge goes, I thought that the defining line
between infringement and satire / fair use was the expectation that the
artwork wouldn't be believed by the "average person".

I guess the problem here is that Nike's marketing efforts are often so
invasive that it was plausible for people to believe that they would buy
and repurpose a historic and public site.

The problem is further complicated by the fact that more and more venues
must look to corporate sponsorship to stay alive and so names like "The
Canon Centre for..." or "The Sony Dome" become commonplace. If artists
and cultural groups can't respond by creating works which examine these
unfortunate trends with an appropriately realistic/slick level of
execution then the power of the corporation becomes even further unbalanced.

-- Davin Risk

Dan Katz wrote:

> I cannot blame Nike for objecting to artists pretending to conduct a Nike
> sales promotion. The reported simulation is so close to reality that it lost
> the artistic distinctiveness it should have. It is more sabotage than art.
> Would this art group approve if someone else produced work in their name?
> If one is going to make art to mock or fight corporate abuses of power or
> undesirable linkages between corporations and governments, it is more
> intelligent to do it in a way that can withstand legitimate legal challenges
> by the corporations.
> Best Wishes,
> Katzdan