Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim65
If the painting were displayed in a museum and they advertised it using his name and image without his permission, would he fight that? If not, then its really about him being mad that they are destroying his work.
I don't like destroying art but if someone buys it, they should be able to wipe their ass with it, if thats their choice.
|
I would disagree with that a bit. Its not solely that they are using his name in advertising, etc but that they seem to be representing by their use of it that the product itself (the watch) is something by him, which it isn’t. He concedes that whoever buys his work can destroy it if they want, but they can’t then go and make new products out of it which they sell by treading on his name.