4 ms·
> But this type of Lichtenstein work never sat well with me. The transformation is extremely minimal - minor changes to the scene, a new cropping, and conversio
by simplotek 3y ago
> But this type of Lichtenstein work never sat well with me. The transformation is extremely minimal - minor changes to the scene, a new cropping, and conversion from ink to painting. If I handed something like that in in school I’d get eviscerated in reviews (or worse!).
If Lichtenstein applied the exact same approach to the Nike logo and plastered it on tshirts, he would be sued to bankruptcy and beyond.
To me it's obvious it's blatant, shameless stealing.
- tsimionescu 3y agoThere are significant differences between trademark law and copyright law. Using the same logo may well be acceptable in a work of art; while using something that resembles it, even if cropped and rotated like here, on a shoe would be quickly stopped by Nike.
- ghaff 3y agoYou mean like the shirts Warhol printed with the Campbell's Tomato Soup can?
- whitemary 3y agoNo. Lichtenstein didn't paint depictions of comic books. He painted the actual images from within the comic books.
- andsoitis 3y agoThere are many many artists who use the Nike logo in their work. https://www.google.com/search?q=paintings+with+nike+logo&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari https://www.google.com/search?q=paintings+with+nike+logo&ie=...