My work on this site is not normally focused on breaking news, but this one just came out an hour ago and it involves the Plesner v. Louis Vuitton case we’ve been discussing over the past weeks. The judge in the Hague ruled today in favor of Plesner’s right to continue to show her painting, Darfurnica, and that her use of the image of a Louis Vuitton bag is both “functional and proportional.”
No word yet from either Nadia or the Vuitton side, but as a newfound voice for Darfur and freedom of expression, she will surely return to the podcast in the future. Click here for the initial report by Radio Netherlands regarding the court ruling.
I’ve never been to a court house in the Netherlands, in my 9 years in this country, somehow I never had cause to enter one. After weaving through some of the plethora of government buildings one can find in the Hague, I somehow managed to find the courthouse, though I was somewhat surprised there was no crowd out front. Considering the importance of the case, which features an art student being sued by a multinational corporation for depicting their product in her art, I figured there would be at least a dozen people holding signs outside in support. Silly me, too many hollywood films with people behind police barricades in front of ye olde city courthouse.
Court House in the Hague
I waltzed my way in and navigated my way through very modern hallways, past doors A through G, until I found my destination, court room H. A uniformed cop sat outside the door, the lonely figure in the hallway, fiddling with his phone in silence. I asked if I could go in and he gave a nonchalant nod. As I carefully opened the door I found myself in the audience, creeping quietly to find a seat, being noticed by all among the 15 to 20 people in attendance. I choose a spot by some people scribbling in notepads, “how old fashioned and quaint” I thought to myself in a condescending technologist tone. I looked forward and studied the figures in the front of the medium sized room, 2 judge looking people behind the big desk facing me, 2 lawyers dressed in black robes, one woman standing at the little microphone going over what seems to be a prewritten text, a young bearded man to her left going through pages of notes. Just next to them I see the long blonde hair and nervous look of who I immediately recognize as Nadia Plesner. She looks sad, which is not a surprise considering the magnitude of damages (5,000€ per day since January) she faces. As I look on the left side of the room, opposite the defence, I see the profile of what looks like a very shrewd legal mind, the Louis Vuitton lawyer. Close behind him sit 4 to 5 extremely well dressed, prim and proper individuals. Behind them two ladies are gabbing away into small microphones, I recognize what has to be simultaneous French translation, I presume, for the people back at the home office. The rest of the audience sits quietly, an assorted crew of concerned faces, occasionally shaking their head in disagreement or agreement with a statement that is made up front. Many are wearing little hand written pins with slogans about supporting art, supporting Nadia, and urging “Louis” to lighten up. And finally I notice there behind all of us, taking up the entire back wall of the court room is the subject of all this activity… the painting – Darfurnica.
I happen to be sitting right in front of the image of the boy holding the chihuahua and the luxurious handbag, which I now know is a Louis Vuitton bag. He’s decked out like Paris Hilton, while all around him are conflicting symbols of death and horror in Darfur, and Hollywood gossip-news-images of the rich and famous. In between are images of influential politicians with some role in what happens or does not happen in Sudan. Above it all, the sun, just like in Picasso’s Guernica, only instead of a lightbulb inside the sun, it is the logo of Petro-China, the oil company with the most investment in Sudan.
Just when I thought it wouldn’t get too exciting and that perhaps this would all be very routine until the judge finally makes a decision, the Vuitton lawyer gets his 20 minutes. Pacing around his little podium area, often with his arms folded, with a booming voice he presented a story filled with drama, conspiracies, and even some stern looks-jabs at the “media” in the room . Looking at the judge, even he seemed half fascinated and half bored with the extent to which events can be dramatized.
After long back and forth presentations and a few heated moments (more than 2 hours later), court is adjourned. It is hard to tell what the judge is thinking, but he’s giving both sides a critical look and has reprimanded them all at different times. As everyone files out into the hall, Nadia stays in the courtroom to do an interview with the big Dutch news program. Outside the Vuitton friends are huddled with the lawyer, they’re discussing where to get some drinks before some of them fly off to wherever it is they live. They’re confident but they keep it to themselves, glancing only occasionally at the young people adorned with pins, chatting only a few steps away.
As the corporate lawyer, now dressed in a very nice suit, walks towards the exit, he passes one of the girls with supportive pins. “May I have one as well, I think these are lovely…”, the somewhat surprised and nervous girl takes a step back and holds her bag of pins close.. “No, these are for those who support Nadia. Therefore not you. I think it wouldn’t be right.” Realizing the moment has passed, the lawyer shakes it off like he was only kidding, and walks out the door.
It has been some time since I mentioned the quiet yet highly dangerous global agreement on copyright that is being drafted and adopted with little public consultation, knowledge or understanding. Where once I had hoped out of all the global players sitting behind closed doors, that the European Union would put a stop to policies and principles that would help to stifle anyone who creates or shares content online. This week we found out that the EU is in fact, going along with ACTA.
For a better idea of just what is going on with this agreement, you can either consult my podcast on this topic, from earlier this year, or more recently I recommend last week’s On the Media program where you can listen to the OTM crew explain ACTA up to the present. It is, as always, very informative and a great listen.
The negotiations are secret as is the text of the agreement, but what is ACTA then? What will adopting this international treaty on counterfeit and piracy effect the everyday activities we take part in offline and online.
My guest, Mike Masnick of techdirt.com, has been following and writing on the topic of ACTA for some time. He joins me on the program to help give an introduction to what it is, what and who it effects, and how it is being developed.
The first time I heard about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) was in a news report on EURACTIV.com about how something called ACTA had suffered a defeat in the EU parliament. I figured it was one of these anti-file sharing, increase-internet surveillance type bills you hear about here and there in the media and through online discussions. Measures of that nature have been threatened and in some cases passed over the past decade with limited coverage and even more limited understanding among the general public.
A little further reading and it turns out that report out of parliament was just the tip of the iceberg. ACTA isn’t a European Union initiative, it turns out – ACTA is an international trade agreement which claims to create international standards on intellectual property rights enforcement throughout the participating countries.
Sound boring? It gets exciting. This trade agreement is being shopped all over the world in an attempt to convince nations to sign on because this will be the agreement that brings effective and up-to-date control over counterfeit goods, generic medicines, as well as “piracy over the Internet”. The terms to achieve these goals are being laid out during rounds of negotiations that have been going on since 2008.
Such an agreement that addresses so many areas of our lives, surely both we and our representatives should be able to read the terms and policies as they take shape? Nope. The negotiations are being handled through closed door sessions, the proceedings are kept secret. Since 2008 some information has leaked and a handful of corporations and organizations have been allowed to look over the treaty. Or so it seems according to some reports.
I have plenty more to learn about this treaty, but one thing that already has me concerned, is the power of this treaty, and the dangerous secrecy with which it is being pushed. In the coming weeks I intend to interview individuals who have insight and knowledge into this treaty and see what more can be learned. This will begin this week with a podcast interview with Michael Massnick of techdirt who has been following ACTA for the past few years.
Ive been scanning the internet, twitter, and general chatter among friends about what is happening with the case of the Pirate Bay versus the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry that is currently taking place in Sweden. The following is a mix of facts and thoughts regarding how the case is going and why this case is taking place. Warning: I eat food during this podcast, maybe you don’t like hearing a person eating.
In the recording I talk about including audio from my interview last year. I decided not to at the last minute. You can just click and listen to it for yourself.
It has been some time since I mentioned the quiet yet highly dangerous global agreement on copyright that is being drafted and adopted with little public consultation, knowledge or understanding. Where once I had hoped out of all the global players sitting behind closed doors, that the European Union would put a stop to policies and principles that would help to stifle anyone who creates or shares content online. This week we found out that the EU is in fact, 
The negotiations are secret as is the text of the agreement, but what is ACTA then? What will adopting this international treaty on counterfeit and piracy effect the everyday activities we take part in offline and online.
The first time I heard about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) was in a 
During the podcast I mention the following sources: