Get some premium American made leather belts and wallets here - Belts: bit.ly/3yWdqmk Wallets: bit.ly/3XHs6CL
@stephane2
Жыл бұрын
The MSCHF shoe was a play off the Vans Old Skool, not the Skate Low. The Skate Lo is a much newer silhouette if I am not mistaken.
@bri1085
Жыл бұрын
Weird mistake to make since they show the old skool throughout the video
@puiaslick
Жыл бұрын
yes he even says that at 4:47 but somehow he sticks with sk8 low XD
@100percentMozarella
Жыл бұрын
@@puiaslick probably the closest shoe they had on hand
@FlacoNukem
Жыл бұрын
I don't see it
@stephane2
Жыл бұрын
@@100percentMozarella just seems odd to not make the distinction, this channel is usually so thorough so I’m assuming it wasn’t intentional
@davep5698
Жыл бұрын
I will never not be impressed with how sharp the parting knife is.
@Hashass1n
Жыл бұрын
It’s a scalpel blade…
@HungA.F.
Жыл бұрын
It’s a scalpel bruh.
@skislope4218
Жыл бұрын
It's actually an awl
@FriendxA
Жыл бұрын
it's not, scalpels typically dont have wooden handles. @@HungA.F.
@fizz576
Жыл бұрын
I think the problem isn't that anyone would confuse these with skate shoes it's that the design and marketing is something a consumer may mistake as a Vans product. As for the defense that this is art so they can make whatever they want that goes out the window when you start selling them.
@pantheratigris00
Жыл бұрын
Are you saying if you sell something, it is no longer art? Limited edition sculptures or screen prints aren't art then?
@fizz576
Жыл бұрын
@pantheratigris00 not exactly. At the time I wrote my comment, I mistakenly thought they made 400,000 of these shoes apposed to 4,000. If they were to have mass produced the shoes, I believe that Vans would have a much stronger case because if they were to mass produce them you could argue that doing so along with their marketing that mimics Vans own advertising could cause people to assume that Vans is somehow involved in the making of the shoes.
@LeviSung
Жыл бұрын
I even thought they were vans products I'm discovering now that they aren't...😂😂😂😂
@olney28
Жыл бұрын
@@LeviSungditto
@ltsmash1200
Жыл бұрын
Right. Somebody could see a person wearing them and think, “ew, why did Vans make those ugly things?” and that could conceivably hurt their brand.
@lazzi2462
Жыл бұрын
You should've grabbed the Vans Old Skool low to make this comparison.
@Mcowling
Жыл бұрын
The main point is it is a trademark dispute. Copyright claims can be selectively enforced by a rights holder but a trademark needs to be enforced at all times. If a trademark isn't enforced the rights holder could lose it and have it deemed generic.
@vasilstefanov4112
Жыл бұрын
The reasons these brands go after things like MSCHF because they need to protect their intellectual property. If they don't sue, other brands may point to this as a reasons for them to actually copy vans design and create knockoffs. But that's just my opinion
@robloxpwnr7604
Жыл бұрын
If they had just released an unmodified Old Skool with their logo slapped on sure, but these should have been protected by parody law. They made substantial enough changes that it could be considered a new thing and a subversion of the original shoe, allowing these corporations to win these suits makes it harder in the future as cases can be based off the ruling decided here.
@joshuaDstarks
Жыл бұрын
No, that’s literally why companies are as litigious as they are. They have to show a care for the IP in order to drive the copyright. It’s also why movie studios crap out ashcan versions of films…just to keep that IP in the portfolio.
@Jzatloukal
Жыл бұрын
Look at how hard Nike went after the ARI Menthol 10s
@sinisterthoughts2896
Жыл бұрын
@@robloxpwnr7604but it isn't parody, legally speaking. This isn't expression, it's commercial. Parody isn't a vague catch-all defense.
@fastenbulbous
Жыл бұрын
@@sinisterthoughts2896I don't understand how you can legally distinguish between the two when art is marketed and sold like any other commercial product. Is it just that it has a practical use?
@blvkoz3538
Жыл бұрын
this is a trademark issue...i have to agree with vans on this one just like i agree with nike going after many companies that copy their shoes but change the logo just a bit.
@jimnorthbound4440
Жыл бұрын
What exactly is trademarked here, other than their logo?
@blvkoz3538
Жыл бұрын
@@jimnorthbound4440 any word, phrase, symbol, design, or a combination of these things that identifies your goods or service.
@sinisterthoughts2896
Жыл бұрын
@@jimnorthbound4440 their logo is more than enough, and the appearance can be enough. when people see it, they would say it looks like a wavy vans, which means it crossed the line.
@MyHallothere
Жыл бұрын
@@jimnorthbound4440he explains what's trademarked in the video
@Enrico-
Жыл бұрын
@@jimnorthbound4440 the jazz stripe logo
@johnnyt7067
Жыл бұрын
MSCHF saying that they are "sampling" the Vans style is fair enough, things like that are done in art. But if you look at music, if one artist samples another artists song, they have to pay to do that. That didn't seem to happen here, so MSCHF can profit from using something created by another party without paying them their due.
@sinisterthoughts2896
Жыл бұрын
Bingo
@JustSomeGuy009
Жыл бұрын
Not just pay, they have to get permission. And they aren't required to give you permission.
@kevinmorrice
7 ай бұрын
its not just sampling, if it was people would be "oh, thats kind of like a vans" but people i knew were like "dude, its clearly a dumb vans"
@bri1085
Жыл бұрын
But unfair to the Vans when you're comparing them to the wrong vans silhouette. Those are based on the Old Skool/Style 36
@FlacoNukem
Жыл бұрын
I don't see it
@Brianwilkes78
Жыл бұрын
If there still in court you just made the argument for the defense you may have won him his case.
@slim2826
Жыл бұрын
@@Brianwilkes78there or their?
@bri1085
Жыл бұрын
@@Brianwilkes78 there their they're?
@JiuJitsuGuy24
Жыл бұрын
nerd
@nicholasbonds5648
Жыл бұрын
I really enjoyed your video. As an IP and trademark law attorney, I wanted to make one point though. To keep trademark protection on a design or a logo or trade dress active, you have to police your own rights. So Vans, while arguably overly assertive in its prosecution of its rights here, technically had to go after the Wavy Baby or risk losing/diminishing their trademark protection. I think you’re totally right though, this shoe is clearly not meant to be a functional skate shoe and is not really threatening Vans’ market share in any meaningful way. Again, great vid and I will never tire of seeing all these shoes and boots cut in half!
@kyleessex6301
9 ай бұрын
Legitimate perspective! Thank you.
@dingo1666
Жыл бұрын
As someone who loathes trainers and has no idea why some become so famous, I totally thought it was Vans who made the wavy baby as they [to my un 'trained' ] eyes look totally the same only distorted. It takes several seconds and close scrutiny to see that they are made by a totally different company. To me that is appropriation and the abuse of the Vans 'fame' to propel their comedy shoe on someone else's back. They could have made them completely different. But what do I know, I wear a 16 year old pair of Kappa trainers as houseshoes and am not ashamed. Meh.
@atymoganetsi729
Жыл бұрын
As someone with a tonne of vans sneakers I thought they collaborated with Vans. After watching this video I still don't understand why Rose thinks Vans suing MSCHF was dumb given that these shoes wouldn't exist without the classic old skook design. They are piggy backing off of Vans just like they did with the Nike air max 97s.
@brianeharmonjr
Жыл бұрын
@@atymoganetsi729 MSCHF are a troll company that is succeeding off other people/companies' IP.
@FlacoNukem
Жыл бұрын
I don't see it
@sinisterthoughts2896
Жыл бұрын
Agreed. I think Rose has an irrational soft spot for 'independent' shoe makers or something, it's blatant infringement.
@MyHallothere
Жыл бұрын
@@atymoganetsi729he likes the mschf so is rationalising it
@Joshua-lz9sk
Жыл бұрын
I’m with vans on this, you can’t argue the fact they look similar but curvy. Only when people who are in the creating industry will say it doesn’t look the same because they need stuff like this so their own items which they create don’t get sued.
@adrnik19
Жыл бұрын
yep, i just took a picture of vans old skool low and distorted it with the liquify tool in photoshop lo and behold, i made a wavy abomination like those things in the video lol
@aidanmanson9007
Жыл бұрын
but the design is obviously different, its basically a parody which are usually completely fine
@sinisterthoughts2896
Жыл бұрын
@@aidanmanson9007 this is not parody. Parody is commentary, this is product mass produced and sold for profit. Also, this is trademark which in this case is based on appearance. It looks like a wavy Vans, i.e. It looks like a Vans. I've commented to you before but you seem to ignore it when people explain to you how the world works.
@No0nesAtHome
Жыл бұрын
@@sinisterthoughts2896touch grass
@ninjalectualx
11 ай бұрын
Google what a parody is
@thenames_maiz9769
3 ай бұрын
Favourite mschf product, by far. Not only because of the product itself but the fact that mschf looked at a vans sneaker and said, "Screw it, we gonna use this to make something cool"
@jadr5989
Жыл бұрын
Gotta agree with Vans on this one. Complete ripoff. The entire basis of design of this shoe comes down to it being based on a classic designed by someone else, without the original Vans design these shoes are irrelevant. He should have done it as a collaboration with Vans or come up with his own unique design not based on their footwear which would have been truly original as an artist.
@lz3390
Жыл бұрын
"We stole someone else's design, made it worse in every measurable way, and charge three times as much for it. We call it art."
@bjmarchives
Жыл бұрын
I don’t know the details of the case. It would have made sense to approach Vans when it was in planning phase to get their permission. Detail the price of the shoe, art concept, limited number made, agree to give them a small percentage, etc. and move on with it or don’t. I am not surprised that they sued, even if I don’t agree.
@MyHallothere
Жыл бұрын
It's mschf normal operation to break trademark claims then say it's art so it doesn't matter when the lawsuit comes in
@chunkymurps
Жыл бұрын
Exactly. Get their blessing, pay them a commission, and it's win win for both of them.
@kevinmorrice
7 ай бұрын
its MSCHF, the only thing they care about is quick case with cheap stolen gimmicks
@tavelkyosoba
Жыл бұрын
The issue isn't that consumers would buy the wrong product by mistake, it's that they could be misled into believing VANS has authorized or endorsed the parody or work of art. Being "art" is literally the problem, not the defense.
@Datpleb
Жыл бұрын
literally this is why the world would be better off freed of lawyers
@jammaschan
Жыл бұрын
@@Datpleb nah I like to live in a society with laws.
@SuperNuclearUnicorn
Жыл бұрын
Yeah 100% some of the people who bought the Wavy Baby did so thinking it was an official collab
@thedarkroom6416
Жыл бұрын
ho w
@tavelkyosoba
Жыл бұрын
@@Datpleb nah lawyers are fine. Without the court system the only way to resolve conflicts is through violence, which is exactly why organized crime is violent. (ok technically court actions do carry the threat of state violence, but still...)
@thiccricc5964
Жыл бұрын
It is so painful to watch Weston compare the wrong shoe, but to see the correct shoe AND wrong shoe on the screen back and forth the whole time.
@Kishiiknight
Жыл бұрын
Definitely Vans was on the right, two warnings and they still went ahead and pushed the shoes out it clearly means they wanted all that smoke why didn’t they reach out for a collab? because they wanted all the money for themselves so of course they got sued it wasn’t for the “art” they were blatantly piggybacking on Vans from the shoe to the marketing
@mystrdat
Жыл бұрын
The cease & desist issued by Vans is completely irrelevant to the topic. I can issue a cease & desist to you to stop commenting, but it would have exactly zero legal weight. Cease & desist serves mostly as a scarecrow, it's not a breach of copyright or some kind of admission of guilt.
@MyHallothere
Жыл бұрын
@@mystrdatit's not completely relevant and will be used in the lawsuit, it shows that vans was trying to enforce the trademark before the product was released
@cotyterry47
Жыл бұрын
Am I the only one that got really happy when he broke the 4 wall and literally raised the curtain
@tryinggaming414
Жыл бұрын
i am not a sneaker head and i can definetly say this ones look exactly like vans . you work and art so u can definetly see the difference but when i first saw this shoes i thought this was a vans pair
@the_33rd
Жыл бұрын
“Judge Kuntz” what a name lol
@lukerichardson2375
11 ай бұрын
Vans was clearly wronged here. I originally thought that the wavy baby was a collaboration with vans and mschf. Even whenever sampling is done in music, those artists are credited on the album and get some royalties.
@GD-ov1km
Жыл бұрын
Vans wasn’t arguing that their shoes were being counterfeited. They were arguing their trademarks, etc. we’re being infringed upon. Defending trademark is standard, recommended practice. If you don’t, you can end up losing them. Cut some small, art brand some slack? Maybe, but there’s risk. As you point out, Vans shoes aren’t much different from other shoes - so what makes them special? Whatever that is, it’s what they’re trying to protect. There’s a very similar situation with guitars - check out all the Gibson guitar lawsuits and counter suits.
@ardyshane23
Жыл бұрын
Maybe if MSCHF would actually work with the brands when they created the shoes. They may find the brands are willing to work with them. It could be mutually beneficial.
@lazzi2462
Жыл бұрын
Shoes I would like to see compared on this channel: - Jordan 4 SBs vs regular Jordan 4s - Certified Lover Boy AF1s vs regular all white AF1s - Travis Scott Olive AJ1 vs Travis Scott Reverse Mocha Low 1s (The Olives were made for women, so I'm wondering if they cheaped out on the materials even more because it sure seems like it) - OG Jordans (from the 80s-90s) vs their retros - A Ma Maniere Jordans vs their regular ones (I especially want to see the AMM 4s, since I have them) - Tiffany AF1s vs regular AF1s - OG Yeezy 350s Turtle Doves vs 2022 release - Nike "By You" Dunks vs regular Dunks (a lot of people are making them & claiming the leather is better just because it's tumbled lol) - Taft Boots vs other boots - New Republic Chelsea boots vs other chelsea boots Love seeing you debunk us Sneakerheads thinking a shoe is better quality than it really is. Lol
@bri1085
Жыл бұрын
Some of those aren't going to come, there are like 4 videos on Air Force. Most of these limited runs basically use the same materials as general releases.
@lazzi2462
Жыл бұрын
@@bri1085 True, I think most of them will be the same. Just would be interesting to see though imo.
@YaBoiTwizzel
Жыл бұрын
Add SIA D1Y vs Kool Kiys and I’m With The List
@madterps
Жыл бұрын
Rose Anvil, can you do cutting of a X-Men Asics sneaker or the Homer Simpsons Stan Smith? BTW, I think Vans is right to sue, it's not the first time that MSCHF has tried to infringe on other peoples IP like their Little Nas Air Max 97
@dodobird194
Жыл бұрын
I worked at Vans when these came out, people came in daily and asked if we had them in stock 😭
@marinusvanmook3658
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for the Phoenix Wright cameo, gotta love our Ace Attorney!
@bassplayer2011ify
Жыл бұрын
If you want to make a piece of art as a commentary on consumerism you should start by not selling it for 220 bucks a pop number one. Number two every aspect of the design screams “I'm lazy”. It's on the same level as Supreme. And no attempt was made to distinguish it from Vans in any way. Had I come across these without seeing a video like this I would have assumed they were Vans.
@PsychoticLeprachaun
Жыл бұрын
I was pretty torn on the whole lawsuit thing since it was ment to be a piece of art, but you're pretty much spot on here
@sinisterthoughts2896
Жыл бұрын
@@PsychoticLeprachaunit's not art, though. It is a mass produced commercial product. Thats like comparing the Mona Lisa to coasters with the image of the mona Lisa printed on it. It's a trademark dispute which basically means they claim he infringed on the look or iconography of something considered identifiable as theirs. It looks like a van, it's infringement.
@brentjacobs7083
Жыл бұрын
Sometimes I cringe when the lace cuts the shoe in half. Today I appreciated it.
@daddykarlmarx6183
8 ай бұрын
I mean it does look cool and it was only one small batch that never was going to seriously compete with vans, however i really think this was about what allowing this could mean in the future. If these kinds of products are allowed legally, that just means companies are going to more boldly copy the designs of other popular sneakers, which would be a terrible legal precedent for the entire industry, with way more cheap copies on the market
@KhalilKathrada
Жыл бұрын
Great video R.A 🙏🏽✨
@WORM_FOOD93
Жыл бұрын
That screen transistion was great. I saw momo in the corner!
@benehnn2803
Жыл бұрын
Legit always wanted to see those shoes on this channel
@rayqun
Жыл бұрын
the shoe is quite obviously inspired by the vans old skool, not the vans skate low. edit: you literally have pictures of them in the video WITH THEIR NAME ATTACHED 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭 edit 2: now youre saying the shoe is clearly different from the "actual one" which isnt the actual one 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
@14s0cc3r14
Жыл бұрын
Rose is wrong on this one. He should stick to shoes, he doesn’t know the law
@anthonytorres7282
Жыл бұрын
What is he wrong about?
@sinisterthoughts2896
Жыл бұрын
@@anthonytorres7282 basically everything about the law. legitimately.
@Enrico-
Жыл бұрын
His name is Weston though
@excessemail2344
Жыл бұрын
Agreed. And unfortunately these companies have no choice but to "squash" things like this. If they don't enforce their trademark, they lose it.
@Kiwitakimago
Жыл бұрын
How would he feel if someone made camera shoulder/body straps just like his but said “they are not for cameras but for phones”! I think he would be pretty upset………or maybe not! Weston do better
@JamesBartlett1994
Жыл бұрын
I'm glad the wavy babys actually shipped because I love mine, but I totally understand why Vans sued. Feels like the whole thing could have been avoided if theyd just done it as a collaboration with Vans. Also, I do wear mine, and idk that you can say it wasn't meant to be worn if all the advertisement showed people wearing them
@NamNguyen-xt4yk
Жыл бұрын
how much did u pay for them wavy baby?
@AimForTheBushes908
Жыл бұрын
These are so cool, would look great as a showpiece in a display case too. How do I find a pair to buy? I dont see them anywhere.
@kittensteaparty
Жыл бұрын
There were only 4000 made and all were sold out. You'd have to get it from the second-hand market when/if a pair becomes available & due to the limited nature of them, their status as a collectible, & mischief's notoriety, it is bound to be quite pricey.
@Iovesosa
Жыл бұрын
would be really interesting so see you review other clothing items, such as jackets. winter is coming up, everyone wants designer, im just tryna get something good quality - because of your videos :D
@bassplayer2011ify
Жыл бұрын
Nicks recently released another collaboration with Heat Straps. It's a 1964 Brown leather chief coat with a wool lining
@Iovesosa
Жыл бұрын
i was thinking smth parka styled, im sure he could get content. mostly just what brands are actually worth the money, and maybe technologies etc. @@bassplayer2011ify
@FragEightyfive
Жыл бұрын
Vans gave MSCHF free advertising. This has been the whole business model of MSCHF, to push copyright and trademark. Many times they get this free advertising, sell out within minutes. Its a great marketing game they play.
@jamesrobinson9176
Жыл бұрын
Obviously stolen ip. Lol pretty sad take
@richardlindner4417
Жыл бұрын
Crown the empire hat! I knew you had good taste in music! 😏🤘
@starkparker16
Жыл бұрын
I'm hoping for a long mullet next year
@dylantyrie
Жыл бұрын
You should cut open some on clouds! They’re stupid comfy but who knows why?
@Snowyyi-
Жыл бұрын
You need to do a video with the Vans New Skool
@ArGeeAye
Жыл бұрын
Really appreciate your reviews and insight on these products. Thank you for the time, work, and dedication on these projects. Please consider a future review on the Danner quarry boots and the Russel Moccasin boots.
@556.45
Жыл бұрын
Not really related to this video, but would be interested to see you cut apart the Altama Maritime Assault. Sort of a purpose-built Chuck Taylor
@ChickenSandwich1138
Жыл бұрын
One of my favorite shoes. An $80 pair will last me almost three years of daily use.
@yunior12
Жыл бұрын
They didn't even try to hide it, same damn shoe, just wavy
@stewie_
Жыл бұрын
As a sneakerhead, I thank the KZitem algorithm for this channel. subbed, love the videos and I can't wait to binge-watch them. I especially love the hat hehe. I was wondering if you could do a video on the Ultra 4D shoes from Adidas. Curious what do you think about the tech they use.
@groghunter7403
Жыл бұрын
Clearly should have been allowed as satire. If hypothetically, these had turned out to be the best shoes ever, MSCHF had started mass producing them, and didn't change the styling, or obtain a license from Vans, that becomes a different case. but what happened in reality, these are clearly fair use.
@toolthoughts
Жыл бұрын
Makia boots might be interesting to see.
@nccfball
Жыл бұрын
Until this video, I thought Vans made those Wavy shoes, not MSCHF. So that is part of taking someone to court, that they mistake something for a known brand to could create a negative branding
@catherine_404
11 ай бұрын
American law is often insane. Copyright and trademark laws are not ok, they are not helping, they seem to be there to promote corporate meddling, not to protect authors. These shoes can not be mistaken for Vans, their design is original. "50 shades of Gray" was inspired by Twilight, but it's an original work nevertheless. I honestly think that it's important that an item is not mistaken for other brand product, distinctly marked. Otherwise it could be almost a copy, I don't think anyone should be able to sue.
@magnetpull7587
11 ай бұрын
The thing with these design infringement lawsuits is that often times the fear is that the brand might loose their base for further claims of design copying if they do not sue, kind of to maintain the strengths of the brand before court. That being said I am surprised this shoe is not a collab
@nickdee5764
Жыл бұрын
It’s wasn’t about the shoe it was about sending a message.
@lorenzobrogi6359
Жыл бұрын
Please cut in half one design of the 3d-printed zellerfeld shoes
@ThePandafriend
Жыл бұрын
To be honest I have to side with Vans in this case. The shoes look like warped Vans and if Vans allows this they don't defend their design/trademark, which can lead to a loss of exclusivity to said trademark/design. MSCHF should have worked out a license agreement. A big problem is also that they are selling it as a product. And their defense is very weak. There is no "sampling" when it comes to trademarks. Also they ignored a court order! As much as I'd prefer it to side with smaller companies, MSCHF brought this on themselves.
@Ewl24
7 ай бұрын
I'm surprised MSCHF didn't use the Parody Clause.. Which states "parody is protected by the First Amendment as a form of expression"
@bri1085
Жыл бұрын
That cash looks like it's out of a PS1 game
@ashton5873hg
Жыл бұрын
You should do Danny Duncan's shoe
@Escapism7133
Жыл бұрын
I'm by no means pro big corporation, and I'm a musician so I completely understand that artists need freedom of expression and to be allowed commentary on culturally relevant topics... That being said MSCHF strikes me as a business that really rides the line of "creative art project" and making quick money via using other's IP in the guise of art. Though, they do limited runs, which certainly helps legally and morally (however limited runs also conveniently means they can charge a lot more). Using their own example against them, music artists have to pay a fee or royalty of some kind to sample another artist, and I don't think MSCHF paid Vans for the right to use any trademarks, copyrights, or IP of Vans.
@daveburklund2295
Жыл бұрын
Sneakers as speech, as art.
@ThecrazyJH96
Жыл бұрын
I actually really dug these as a vans old skool fan. I’d probably just have them up as a display type piece and not wear them though lol
@luv-lost
11 ай бұрын
The response from the MSCHF people really makes sense. No one is skating those things unless it's a joke or YT vid. I thought MSCHF was cringe artsy crap, but I respect the response and understand their goal with some of these off the wall things they do. I may try to get some drops from them.
@Morbpious
10 ай бұрын
nice pun
@JaysonBucy
Жыл бұрын
This one really has me messed up because I think Vans has a right to protect their IP but I don't think MSCHF did any appreciable harm with this and in fact would say that they might have brought more favorable attention to Vans if it weren't for the lawsuit. I really think Vans missed a great PR opportunity.
@sinisterthoughts2896
Жыл бұрын
Trademark law is strict. If you don't defend it, it sets the precedent. If someone else did infringement they could use this case as precedent claiming the trademark is moot. If they didn't sue, they would have lost all their claims to their looks and logo. So they had no choice. The rapper could have collabed, but then his profit margin would be lower. So instead he banked on inflated prices due to the legal intrigue.
@thisismenotgivingafu
Жыл бұрын
Can we get the Alpinestars Supervictory? It’s an iconic boot, not a hypebeast sneaker.
@itsmejak7888
Жыл бұрын
i feel like if they only made 400 pairs or less they could consider it art but anything over 500 just really seems like a product to me as another commenter brought up this is basically like sampling in the music world you need to get permission first AND pay royalties and if you don't you get sued and music is art that you get royalties from similar to this shoe also protecting intellectual property is imperative to keeping your iconic brand image YOUR iconic brand image
@UtahSustainGardening
Жыл бұрын
Neither company is a hero here. MSCHF products do not strike me as art, rather, they are just a marketing company that happens to get attention for manufactured products.
@Sm0lm0l
10 ай бұрын
I actually side with Vans on this issue. There are a ton of Van Dupes on the market, most of which go without any issue as long as they don’t rip logos and exact designs. The reason the Van Dupes aren’t sued is because they don’t try to portray themselves as Vans products (commentary or not). The Average consumer can see with the packaging and the logos that clearly the Dupe is not the actual Van Product. With these it leaves room for someone to interpret them as a Van Product. If the marketing and packaging wasn’t clearly ripping from Vans it wouldn’t be an issue, despite the fact that Mischief was doing it as a commentary. Band losing this case could allow future brands and dupes to claim the same thing down the line. Produce the similar shoe, and market it the same way. And pass their shitty knock offs as the real deal, scamming the consumer. I’m usually against big corporations but in this case I’m not. I don’t see why mischief couldn’t do a collaboration with vans to avoid this issue. :/
@pantheratigris00
Жыл бұрын
I think if they had made a much more limited run, they could have gotten away with the art argument. But then Vans did just grant MSCHF the seal of infamy with the whole if it is outlawed, then it's even more desirable.
@SuperNuclearUnicorn
Жыл бұрын
That's absolutely what MSCHF wanted, same as with Satan and Jesus shoes. They wanted the media attention and got it
@boowiebear
Жыл бұрын
If he made one pair as an art piece, that is an homage. Making 4000 and selling them is IP theft.
@kxdgraphics
Жыл бұрын
Can you make a review about Puma Slipsteam? Love your videos friend
@rogerbussiii
Жыл бұрын
I think there's something you don't understand about intellectual property. There is a reason brands like Ferrari and in this case vans are so protective of their ip. Their registered trademarks are theirs. If anyone else should use thier ip and they do not defend their trademark in court others can then violate the trademark and use the other example of it not being defended and win in court. They must defend thier ip in every instance it they want to keep it at all. The first time its used without contract and not challenged its over.
@al3ert3erett
7 ай бұрын
Cut the AC.1 and AC.2 please!
@andrasfazekas5414
Жыл бұрын
Can you do Rick Owens?
@iamnathankim
Жыл бұрын
Has anyone noticed that the video title has a typo????????
@Guts3570
Жыл бұрын
somebody rested their shoe on the edge of a firepit twice and decided to charge $200 for it.
@trah666
Жыл бұрын
If you could find a pair of those newport methol jodans to cut apart that would be rad... that the earliest example of "artistic" hype shoes i can think of
@will-dd7ou
Жыл бұрын
Can y'all do a video on nicks cowboy boots? I would love to see how they compared to chisos
@Anti_Goose
Жыл бұрын
Love the videos 😍
@roi_4_dayz
Жыл бұрын
This video showing up to a courtroom near you
@tweezerjam
Жыл бұрын
I’d say Vans had a case here. Its clear what they were doing, imo. Like be better
@Toogood0899
9 ай бұрын
Vans defo had the wright as it’s definitely a copy off vans even if it’s not a skate shoe they should have ask vans first as vans is technically a small company two also vans gave them the inspiration
@Morbpious
10 ай бұрын
It may look like actual vans if you're a 2yr old that can't distinguish shapes yet.
@EvilSSP
Жыл бұрын
If "art" is all that it was, there wouldn't be a problem. It's making money off of that art that becomes a copyright infringement. If they made these and put them on display in an art gallery they wouldn't have been sued.
@markopolo9936
Жыл бұрын
I don’t remember Phoenix Wright saying any of that, and I should know!!!
@sinisterthoughts2896
Жыл бұрын
"Slimy move" by vans? To protect their IP from someone intentionally infringing, even you keep admitting it before back pedalling.
@bluedreamchicago9319
Жыл бұрын
Do yeezy slide they're comfy ass sole !!!
@NickMick9
Жыл бұрын
I have to assume that judge pronounces it koontz.
@MGInvesting
Жыл бұрын
Nice Crown the Empire Hat
@iony9963
Жыл бұрын
Knowing that I have clicked on your video thinking you are talking about a Vans release, I only see an artist monetising on a cult built by Vans. The shoe screams Vans by all means and it could have been a colab but the “artist has chosen to be all original
@siyandashane8662
Жыл бұрын
Bro has to be drunk not to see this this a an oldskool
@jessechuff
Жыл бұрын
its hilarious to me when every brand mschf spoofs does exactly what they want them to do. like yeah, makes sense you wanna protect your brand but the "winning" move for the brands (at least to me) is to ignore stuff like this because otherwise it just gains more publicity and intrigue. also, just nonsensical to think this would realistically steal any meaningful sales from vans. also mschf shoes seem to be better quality than the shoes they spoof so idk man. if people were gonna buy your $60 shoe, they would have and do. i guess i wouldn't say it's wrong of vans to do what they did, it's just taking obvious bait. this is vans we are talking about, and nike being another "victim". they aren't the underdog. i just love how mschf really pushes boundaries and checks these corporations and constructs all the time. it's maybe not always the most noble cause, but it's exciting.
@ShilohBoca
Жыл бұрын
Of course they're a rip off of Vans and I hope they take these fakes to the cleaners. For you to dismiss the fact that it's okay to make something out of an original idea and make money makes me know you have no respect for artists. When I saw pictures of these before I assumed they were Vans. And if Vans has trade mark over every concept of the original then no one else should make money from it. You are reaching by saying "it's not a skating shoe". Vans is saying "they took what's ours and changed it a bit and profiting from it" they're not saying "you can skate on these and we're the only ones that can make skate shoes". Unsubscribed. Your argument is ridiculous.
@uknorlm1469
Жыл бұрын
Need a review on the motion 6 timberland.
@grasupapucaru724
Жыл бұрын
Am I the only one who has seen the glitches and the face in the background at the beginning?
@TreillThaBlazer
Жыл бұрын
The wavy baby looks like they bit the design of the Vans old skool.
@elec7ricwaffle163
Жыл бұрын
These are a rad shoe that I wish were more available
Пікірлер: 453