mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

Lawsuit Against GM And Use Of Mural In Cadillac XT5 Ad Proceeds

General Motors officially has new litigation to fight as a federal judge in Los Angeles has allowed a lawsuit against the automaker to proceed, the Detroit Free Press reported Tuesday. Swiss artist Adrian Falkner, who signs his work “Smash 137,” filed the lawsuit alleging GM used his work in a Cadillac XT5 ad campaign without consent.

The artwork in question is a mural painted atop a Detroit, Michigan, parking garage. The mural appears in the photo of a Cadillac XT5 crossover, which the brand used on social media. GM argues it did not include the photo and Falkner’s artwork in larger campaigns but only used it on owned social media channels. The automaker also previously argued the mural is “architectural work” and it cannot be held responsible for copyright infringement.

GM Renaissance Center Night Time - GM Ren Cen - Winter 2016 008

“This right to photograph an architectural work extends to those portions of the work containing pictorial, graphic or sculptural elements,” the court filing stated in July. “Because [Falkner’s] mural is painted onto an architectural work it falls squarely within the ‘pictorial representation’ exemption, and his copyright infringement claim should be dismissed.”

Falkner’s suit says Cadillac’s “The Art of the Drive” campaign could have reached millions of people on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, and that the “exploitation of plaintiff’s work damages his reputation, especially because he has carefully and selectively approached any association with corporate culture and mass-market consumerism.”

2018 Cadillac XT5 exterior 001

The artist’s attorney said the decision to let the lawsuit proceed is a “massive victory for artists’ rights.” Indeed, the suit could set a precedent since there’s aren’t clear boundaries on protections for artwork like graffiti.

J. Michael Keyes, an intellectual property attorney and partner at the international law firm of Dorsey & Whitney, said, “Graffiti artists and other muralists will likely be buoyed by — and interested in — the court’s decision. It opens the door for them to bring copyright claims for works of art painted on certain architectural works … potentially.”

The judge sided with GM on two other matters, however: a request for summary judgment, including precluding punitive damages.

Former GM Authority staff writer.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. So GM pursues vigorously any automakers, like the Chinese, who copy their designs. They attack folks who make non-OEM parts and sue them blind in courts. But apparently it’s OK to do the exact same thing, as long as it’s a painting. Bullish!t GM. Hypocrisy massively! Stop it and pay up, you can well afford it.

    Reply
  2. Go GM!!! This talentless hack should be happy his ugly “art” gets some exposure. Hopefully Miss Mary and the boys will leave him destitute.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel