NFT digital collections are selling well, and well-known brands are at war with artists

Source: Sina Technology

There is reportedly a battle going on between artists and brands, both of whom want to fight for their own turf and rights in the metaverse. Artists and brands are fighting over who has the right to sell NFTs.

Olive Garden, Hermès and Miramax have all taken legal action against NFT projects that the companies argue infringe on their trademark or contractual rights.

After a legal letter from corporate lawyers, olive gardens and the MetaBirkin NFT project were both taken down from the popular token exchange market OpenSea.

For Brian Moore and Mike Lacher, Olive Garden is the most inclusive business, serving unlimited bread bars and whose slogan is to treat every guest as family.

So when the two digital artists wanted to create an NFT art collection that the average person felt was receptive to, they turned their attention to the two-person favorite casual restaurant. The 880 Non-Fungible Olive Gardens created by Moore and Rachel are basically digital photos of olive garden restaurants in the real world, each encoded on the blockchain as a unique asset.

They sell the digital artworks for $19.99 and have also built an active Discord community where people can act as diners.

However, 10 days later, Olive Garden made it clear that they did not endorse the two artists and the NFT works they had created.

On December 30 last year, Darden Restaurants, the owner of Olive Garden, issued a notice of takedown to OpenSea. OpenSea then removed the organizers from the platform and began blocking transactions on related NFTs, a move that led to a conflict between the Olive Garden enthusiast community and the brand.

In the NFT boom, attorney letters and legal threats are becoming more common. In some cases, artists can only actively defend their rights, forced to play the role of "policeman", "hunting down" scammers who make NFT versions of other people's artworks and sell them. More important is the contradiction between the corporate brand and the artist, with both sides having different views on the purpose and value of the NFT.

There used to be a fairly clear distinction between the fair use of a company's brand or trademark in a work of art and the commercial misappropriation of a brand to deceive customers, but this distinction is becoming blurred by the rise of blockchain technology and the desire of everyone to have a place in the metaverse.

In the eyes of the holder, the NFT of luxury watches (such as Rolex) is a work of art. However, for watchmakers who are considering commercial activities in new virtual areas, digital watches are another version of their products, and may be able to use this as a breakthrough to enter the current metacosm.

Many brands think they will have a place in the metacosm, where having a digital store, or selling digital products in the form of NFTs, may mean that they can attract a new generation of consumers and generate more revenue for the business. Nike recently acquired an NFT company that makes digital sneakers and even started selling digital versions of its products.

However, Hermès and Hollywood studio Miramax are preventing others from making and selling NFTs related to their brands. These disputes are all examples, and as the internet evolves into an immersive, blockchain-based field, new challenges and unresolved issues are likely to emerge more frequently.

Artist Mason Rothschild, who created NFT works of Hermès Birkin handbags covered in fur, wrote in an open letter to Hermès in December after receiving a cessation order from Hermès: "This is a wave of innovation and evolution, and your actions can help determine the future of art in the metaverse." ”

Hermès said they prefer to focus on "the tangible expression of handmade objects". "These NFTs infringe on Hermès' intellectual property and trademark rights, and they are passing off Hermès brands in the metacosm," the company said. ”

This week, film director Quentin Tarantino will try to sell the NFT script for the 1994 blockbuster "Drunken Fans," which will be one of the most high-profile disputes involving the NFT.

Quentin's NFT series includes seven unique NFT titles that will give their owners access to digital images of the original handwritten film script, as well as audio reviews that Quentin has never released before. Miramax, the Hollywood studio that made the film, sued Quentin in November to try to stop it from selling the NFTs.

In the lawsuit, Miramax argued that Quentin's NFT project violated a contract signed by the parties in 1993. While the contract reserves Quentin's right to earn script fees from print books and interactive media, it doesn't explicitly mention NFTs because NFTs were invented 20 years after the film's release. But the contract gives Miramax "all" other rights, which the company's lawyers believe include the power to develop, market and sell NFTs. Laustala, a professor at UCLA, believes the crux of the matter is whether Quentin's contract with Miramax allows him to sell a script.

Quentin did not compromise. In response to the lawsuit, its lawyers accused Miramax of using the concept of NFTs to confuse the public, mislead the courts, and try to deprive artists such as Quentin of their long-term rights.

Quentin's first NFT bid will begin on Jan. 17.

High expectations of the NFT are driving its value, as evidenced by OpenSea, which was recently valued at $13.3 billion by private investors.