Louis Vuitton, Fashion, Darfur and Copyright: 1 Simple Charity Rule

How far can one go for charity, especially the artistic types like those who design tees? Even if it is a worthy fund raising project for genocide victims in Darfur, Sudan or, say, a children’s global cancer awareness campaign?

Well, this question can better be answered when you consider that charity knows no copyright, especially when it involves a fashion icon like Louis Vuitton and one of the French fashion house’s creations.

For 26 year old Danish art student, Nadia Plesner, being slapped with a copyright infringement lawsuit demanding “$7,500 for each day she keeps selling the product, $7,500 for each day she displays Louis Vuitton’s cease-and-desist letter and $ 7,500 for each day she mentions the name ‘Louis Vuitton’ on her website” has never overridden a good cause and she is as defiant as ever.

Those sums and more - legal costs for the suit and another $15,000 for related “other expenses”. But what would Louis Vuitton do with the money if their lawsuit succeeds? Of two guesses, only one can suffice; either to fund further research for a hyped luxury product or give away to victims of the war in Darfur.

• » See also: Mistaken Identity: Hunters Kill Endangered Pygmy Hippo
• » Get EcoWorldly by RSS or sign up by email.

To raise funds (she has raised more than US$ 30,000 so far) for the charity, Divest for Darfur, Nadia created a motif on a t-shirt with an image of an emaciated Darfurian clutching a bag and her chihuahua. She intended to portray that the Western media was too pre-occupied with celebrity trivia while events of more concern were happening elsewhere in the world.

According to suit papers and a letter sent to the young artist, Louis Vuitton claims the bag in the motif resembles one of their creations: “Although we applaud your efforts to raise awareness and funds to help Darfur, a most worthy cause, we cannot help noticing that the design of the Simple Living Products includes the reproduction of a bag infringing on Louis Vuitton’s Intellectual Property Rights, in particular the Louis Vuitton Monogram Multicolore Trademark to which it is confusingly similar. We are surprised of such a promotion of a counterfeit bag”.

Why a motif on an emaciated Darfurian clutching a designer bag? Nadia explained: “My Simple Living illustration is an idea inspired by the media’s constant cover of completely meaningless things. My thought was, since doing nothing but wearing designer bags and small ugly dogs apparently is enough to get you on a magazine cover, maybe it is worth a try for people who actually deserve and need attention.”

She says on her website: I stand up for my artistic freedom to express my view of the world as I see it without restrictions from anybody. I (have) informed Louis Vuitton’s Intellectual Property Director that I intend to continue my campaign to support the victims of Darfur.”

But the artistic directors at Louis Vuitton are not seeing charity or ethics in Nadia’s creation, or any infatuation with celebrities like Paris Hilton or Pamela Anderson clutching one of their products with a dog in tow.

One simple rule for doing good that must never be forgotten - forget the hype, fashion and charity sometimes do clash, know where the demarcation begins.

Image courtesy: Nadia Plesner

Tweet This Post