"Zara Boycott, Copyright Act and the Blogger Echo Chamber"

Discussion in 'Rumor has it...' started by Nicolasa, May 29, 2010.

  1. Nicolasa

    Nicolasa New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,437
    Likes Received:
    0
    Passionate debate following the controversy arising around the alleged use of a photograph of the blogger Betty Autier (www.leblogdebetty.com) in a Zara t-shirt:


    GANYMEDE KIDS (www.ganymedekids.blogspot.com)
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    To read the entire entry: http://ganymedekids.blogspot.com/2010/05/zara-boycott-copyright-act-and-blogger.html
     
  2. Psylocke

    Psylocke Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    It definitely is somewhat ironic that the post below the one about how mad she is at Zara is of her wearing a Zara tee that is an obvious Balmain knock off. However I do understand this Betty person being pissed off, because it's not an idea or creation that was stolen, it's her face. That sure makes a difference. But it's still her own fault. It's the same for celebrities; once they decide to become public figures, they will lose any power over what their face or body will be used for. But why would anyone boycott Zara because of this? :blink:
     
  3. retailqueen

    retailqueen New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Messages:
    2,291
    Likes Received:
    0
    Zara is the shop for people who want desginer knock offs, so I don't undertsnad the anger.
     
  4. rayoflight

    rayoflight New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    608
    Likes Received:
    0
    Theres a love/hate relationship between me and Zara.
    I have a few things from Zara, mostly because they still still Dior Homme knock-offs, the old Dior, not the garbage with Blow sunnies and 3/4 pants or slouchy goth wear.
    On the other hand I really hate Zara for knocking off designers, the snob in me says that if you want runway look, be ready to pay the big $$$. If not, leave it be. But honestly they are not the only ones who do that and sometimes I rather pay $20 for a striped polo shirt from Zara than $200 for striped polo with a bee on it, fit and fabric quality aside.
    And I'd be pretty pi$$ed off too if I walked in a store and saw my face on a tshirt... Theres no way I'd feel flattered, I'd feel violated and boycott would the least I'd do.
     
  5. Les_Sucettes

    Les_Sucettes Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,000
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would feel offended if they used a cartoon of my face without permission. Zara is wrong. But I once I had knowledge of a similar case as this, and the person lost, EXACTLY because it asked for a percentage of profits. Once thing is asking the T-shirt to be removed because you are offended your image is being used, another thing is asking to profit from it. I do not Know if bloggers, since they are virtually public figures would have the same "rights" as someone totally anonymous. I do not think Kate Moss, or the photographer, receives a percentage everytime her face his used for art for example.

    But i would never boycott Zara because of the Knock Offs, are they really knock offs, when was the last time a designer was original?
     
  6. ErnstLudwig

    ErnstLudwig New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2010
    Messages:
    211
    Likes Received:
    0
    indeed normally they are all happy that they "copy" designer stuff really fast... but now they see the other site of it ;)


    b2t you always have the copyright of your picture even if they convert it into "art" (something new). But I have no clue what happens if you post them on a blog for "free" yourself and not via an agency... Reminds me of the Obama campain image.
     
  7. Legyviel

    Legyviel in the mood for love

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2005
    Messages:
    2,894
    Likes Received:
    0
    lol, there's no way I'm boycotting Zara, this is just silly. It's my favourtie shop and no, I don't buy most of the knockoffs, at least not the obvious ones. Topshop does it, H&M does it, etc. However it's crappy of them not to inform the blogger that they used her image. and LOL at Danny Roberts
     
  8. Urban Stylin

    Urban Stylin ɐʎ ʎǝɥ

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2003
    Messages:
    17,889
    Likes Received:
    0
    she shd get a cut 4 real
     
  9. Karen0193

    Karen0193 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,834
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm very sure that no one is gonna boycott Zara :rolleyes:
     
  10. Scott

    Scott Stitch:the Hand

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Messages:
    13,146
    Likes Received:
    0
    the sad thing is copying fashion work has become a way of business. it all started with the imitation handbags and now it's trickled into our favourite high-street locations.

    i do find it quite awful that while they were utilising this idea and making the t'shirt they didn't find the time to actually inform this woman they are or wanted to use her likeness. if anything the bad publicity could affect sales but i doubt it. i'm not sure the legalities but i'm sure she could have a case seeing as they did actually use a personal image from her personal blog to sell a product without her permission. could be a privacy violation,i would suspect. and boycotting is great and all out of principle but for some people it's not really option if you have none.

    and i do agree she at least deserves a percentage of what the shirt makes.
     
    #10 Scott, May 30, 2010
    Last edited by moderator cin: May 30, 2010
  11. Les_Sucettes

    Les_Sucettes Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,000
    Likes Received:
    0
    She cannot in any way ask for a percentage. The illustration is derivative of her photo, so no copyright infringement .
    If she was a total anonymous person, she maybe could go to court and claim misuse of her image(face) causing her distress, damages etc. But the only thing she could request would be that the T-shirt would be taken down. If she asked for a share of the profits, it would be clear for the judge that no offense was taken for the use of the image, so the all case would fall down.
    But being a blogger i do not even Know if this would apply, if she's not already a "public" person, plus it's not even her "real" image.

    Still, Zara should have asked.
     
  12. Spike413

    Spike413 barcode

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2004
    Messages:
    14,924
    Likes Received:
    0
    Even though we'd all like to think that Zara would have had the sense to inform her first, the truth is that in the blogosphere, with one blogger posting pics from another, who posted their pics from someone else, there's no proof that they even knew who she was or where the image was originally from.

    I'd be surprised if this ever went to court as some kind of copyright case. The only thing she can claim the right to is the face in the illustration, and I'm pretty sure someone's likeness isn't protected by copyright law.

    As an aside I'm shocked she's complaining. I'd think that anyone who documents their life and wardrobe in pictures and posts them for strangers to see would be thrilled at the prospect of being immortalized...temporarily anyway. Something tells me that if they paid her in some way she'd be plugging the shirt, not calling for a boycott.
     
  13. Drusilla_

    Drusilla_ New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    383
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^ I'm sure she'd have been happy to be asked for permission, and I actually think the illustration is pretty. I think, as Psylocke says, the real problem she might have is them using an image of her/stealing her face, as it were. It's not as if they stuck the original photograph on a t-shirt.
    As for Danny Roberts, the real issue is whether the illustrations he does are, as a derivative work, sufficiently transformative to stand as works in their own right. But if Betty has a case against Zara for ripping off her photograph by making an illustration of it, the owners of the copyrights in the photographs drawn by Mr Roberts would also have a case against him for the same thing. And who knows, a court might not agree with me.
     
  14. ultramarine

    ultramarine chaos reigns

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    6,580
    Likes Received:
    0
    But this has been around for AGES ... even before bloggers (are there people over 20 left in tFS?) .... have you seen Picasso's version of "Les Demoiselles d'Avignon"?Or most of Andy Warhol's work?This, my fellow tFSers is a very fine line .. I, myself cant even form a fully formed opinion on it.
     
  15. silk skin paws

    silk skin paws doldrums

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,358
    Likes Received:
    0
    They were wrong for using her image. I don't think she can really do anything about it. There's a likeness between the picture and print but not a exact.
     
  16. timebomb

    timebomb New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
  17. lottie342

    lottie342 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    674
    Likes Received:
    0
    They should have asked her permission before using the image, but bloggers are becoming more and more like celebrities these days, and I doubt people like Kate Moss get cuts when their faces are put on t-shirts and it happens all the time.
     
  18. MulletProof

    MulletProof Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    26,040
    Likes Received:
    9
    Bloggers are a trend, very few of them will retain the same attention in 5 years.. Zara and Forever21 do trends, and often fill up their racks with some pretty desperate-looking stuff, like in this case.. don't see what's the big deal, I don't see Tavi or the more well-known girls complaining about it or being naive enough to call for a boycott.. it seems like the less known girl is the one that's stirring it up, I didn't know who she was so I visited her blog and.. I wonder if she's even after profit, sounds more like her ego is hurt and she had to make it public somehow at least by masking it as outrage, she probably expected some big press and even bigger announcement of a Zara-blogger collaboration.. the worst part is that she seems really convinced that she's some starving artist that's been abused by a big conglomerate.. leave that to Bliss Lau!, does she even realise it's the action of her picture what they're after? the starbucks in hand (not in this case) + sunglasses + photo-whore/the-paps-love-me pose that can easily be found in the next blog and which represents the current generation is what made it attractive for Zara and what will work for some customers? that it isn't really her or whatever she thinks her special art is?. I too doubt Kate Moss asks for a profit every time UO or F21 and even Charlotte Russe print her face in their products so.. really, this girl needs to grow up a little and get over herself and just see it for what it is.
     
  19. lucy92

    lucy92 Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    12,803
    Likes Received:
    0
    shepard fairey was the recipient of a lawsuit brought on by an AP photographer on an image he based his famous "hope" poster on. you can read about that contraversy here
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_"Hope"_poster

    i dont think the zara images count as fair use. and i think i'd be creeped out if my image was on a tee shirt.
     
  20. mamasarollingsto

    mamasarollingsto New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Messages:
    378
    Likes Received:
    0
    Realistically, they could have just asked her permission, sent her a few free clothes and got a ton of great publicity on her blog as part of the deal. Instead.. this!
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"