Hermes and Birkin NFTs

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

#17
haute okole said:
Hermes has a legal interest in going after anyone who tries to profit from Hermes’ name and likeness, whether the bag is functioning. Hermes should take the opportunity to create their own NFTs for the Metaverse, like Nike.
Click to expand...
Wonder if there will also be a wait list & prespend in the Metaverse before one can buy a MetaQB? Does one also need to develop a relationship with her MetaSA? :)
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Smae-ze, WingNut, Hermes Nuttynut and 3 others
#19
  • Like
Reactions: hermeslady, etoupebirkin and jellyv
#20
Beyond basic trademark protection, Hermés cannot afford to have something like "MetaBirkins" pass. Given that digital jewelry (which is usually also NFT-based) has become pretty commonplace in Zooms these days, digital scarves and bags are easy to imagine. There are multiple startups now selling digital fashion. This artist should have thought things through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jellyv and Notorious Pink
#21
I am just wondering when our @Meta is going to challenge Meta (previously Facebook/Instagram/etc) from using her name :biggrin:


IME, even some digital artists who make NFTs don't altogether understand them (see Wingham).

As you can see from all the media coverage Mason Rothschild is not his (or her?) real name. The whole persona is another publicity stunt. It's a pose to look like s/he is an anti-capitalist whilst being one. Looking like being an anti-art artist when you'd rather print money has been going on for ever, hardly original. Damien Hirst notified his diamond-encrusted skull sold for its asking price of £100M, later he admitted he bought it from himself/White Cube (read more here. )

Basically most artists just find a very public way of promoting their work through the media however they can and fixing a price to a for to set a precedent. Getting sued actually helps their cause as the brand becomes the hateful establishment figure and the whole drama creates more drama.

Lots of artists are jumping on the same bandwagon so I guess H had to do something. Debbie Wingham already did an NFT that was commissioned for £500 000 read more about it here
 
  • Haha
  • Insightful
  • Like
Reactions: leechiyong, hclubfan, haute okole and 2 others
#22
papertiger said:
I am just wondering when our @Meta is going to challenge Meta (previously Facebook/Instagram/etc) from using her name :biggrin:


IME, even some digital artists who make NFTs don't altogether understand them (see Wingham).

As you can see from all the media coverage Mason Rothschild is not his (or her?) real name. The whole persona is another publicity stunt. It's a pose to look like s/he is an anti-capitalist whilst being one. Looking like being an anti-art artist when you'd rather print money has been going on for ever, hardly original. Damien Hirst notified his diamond-encrusted skull sold for its asking price of £100M, later he admitted he bought it from himself/White Cube (read more here. )

Basically most artists just find a very public way of promoting their work through the media however they can and fixing a price to a for to set a precedent. Getting sued actually helps their cause as the brand becomes the hateful establishment figure and the whole drama creates more drama.

Lots of artists are jumping on the same bandwagon so I guess H had to do something. Debbie Wingham already did an NFT that was commissioned for £500 000 read more about it here
Click to expand...

Loved your post, @papertiger - SO true!
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: papertiger
#23
I think like "fan art" it's ok to make something for yourself, but you can't sell something that uses another company or person's intellectual property to sell it.
Like you can paint a picture (for your own use) of a Hermes Birkin, but you can't sell it with the "Hermes Paris Made In France" stamping included in the painting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haute okole and papertiger
#24
KellyObsessed said:
I think like "fan art" it's ok to make something for yourself, but you can't sell something that uses another company or person's intellectual property to sell it.
Like you can paint a picture (for your own use) of a Hermes Birkin, but you can't sell it with the "Hermes Paris Made In France" stamping included in the painting.
Click to expand...

But even it being a recognised bag, and calling it a Birkin is profiting from Hermès' reputation and heritage (even if someone can't read the logo)
 
#25
KellyObsessed said:
I think like "fan art" it's ok to make something for yourself, but you can't sell something that uses another company or person's intellectual property to sell it.
Like you can paint a picture (for your own use) of a Hermes Birkin, but you can't sell it with the "Hermes Paris Made In France" stamping included in the painting.
Click to expand...
So funny that you posted this! I specifically do NOT draw hallmarks for exactly this reason.

papertiger said:
But even it being a recognised bag, and calling it a Birkin is profiting from Hermès' reputation and heritage (even if someone can't read the logo)
Click to expand...
That’s if you are giving it a title, like this guy did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hermes Zen
#28
Saw that and came here to see if anyone else read the article. I studied trademark law decades ago so I am no expert but… Hermès has a bit of a challenge here, in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDA
#29
Win or lose, it was the kind of zero tolerance action that Hermes had to take as a deterrent to others who might consider using an image of something Hermes (for profit?).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top