Kellie-Jay Keen is threatened with legal action by Campbell's over fundraising mug

Got it. Thank you!

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
F113 30A Caricature, parody or pastiche
(1) Fair dealing with a work for the purposes of caricature, parody or pastiche does not infringe copyright in the work.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48

So in order to justify copyright violation, you have to both be going after the same market?

No, but I believe it is a criteria that can be used in a defence.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright

Certain exceptions only apply if the use of the work is a ‘fair dealing’. For example, the exceptions relating to research and private study, criticism or review, or news reporting.

‘Fair dealing’ is a legal term used to establish whether a use of copyright material is lawful or whether it infringes copyright. There is no statutory definition of fair dealing - it will always be a matter of fact, degree and impression in each case. The question to be asked is: how would a fair-minded and honest person have dealt with the work?

Factors that have been identified by the courts as relevant in determining whether a particular dealing with a work is fair include:

• does using the work affect the market for the original work? If a use of a work acts as a substitute for it, causing the owner to lose revenue, then it is not likely to be fair
• is the amount of the work taken reasonable and appropriate? Was it necessary to use the amount that was taken? Usually only part of a work may be used

I just emailed Campbells soups that this adult human female will be adjusting her shopping list

I don't buy Campbell's soup anyway (and I wouldn't now if I did) but I have treated myself to a Posie soup mug and pin badge.

I had no idea about this until I saw this thread, so of course I’ve had to buy one of the mugs…

Campbell's are seriously pissing up a stick with this one. There are hundreds of businesses offering Campbell's soup mugs. How about this one:

www.amazon.com/Campbells-Soup-Container-Removable-Cup/dp/B01DH58MOU/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?keywords=campbells+soup+mug&qid=1694688981&sr=8-3

It's almost as if they want to give her free publicity.

I can't see how it would meet the tests for copywrite infringement. It is easily identifiable as not Campbells, it is obviously a parody. She should probably ask them to set out how they think her products impinge on theri copywrite, against each test. I would love to hear them justify how someone would buy her mug rather then a tin of soup. Even better to hear them try and justify it in court...

Yes m'lud, people who are looking for a £1.50 tin of soup will instead opt for a mug with no consumable contents...

Well done to the TRAs who reported this to Campbells. Streisand effect in its full glory

No, you don't have to be going after the same market (see Vogue example, magazine vs pub).
And I think Andy Warhol probably was breaching copyright but they let him off because.....Andy Warhol.

So in order to justify copyright violation, you have to both be going after the same market?

So Posie would have to be pinching the soup buyers off Campbell's. Is that right?

Or are Campbell's really admitting that the people they are tailoring their marketing to are The Terven? 😁

I mean, they should be, obviously we are the soup buyers. But it's probably not what the TRAs had in mind 🤣

I wonder how they justify going after some people and not others when they're doing the same thing? Posie's merch looks more like an Andy Warhol ripoff than the can itself - so how can they justify going after her and not AW products? The tate has a bag with a copy of the AW can on at the moment, for sale, for example?

Ah yes, the answer will be misogyny of course.

Since she's not competing for the same market I can't see how they'd win.

Lovely sunlight and free advertising though.

Well, so Campbell's is the soup of youthful melts and bearded men. Unfortunately, I can't add it to my boycott list, since I don't ever eat it anyway.

Who buys Campbells tomato soup in this country? Heinz tomato all the way in this house! It’s not surprising they’ve come after her for copyright - some companies are quite vigilant and in some ways I’m not entirely unsympathetic. But if they go after her they should be going after a load of other people who have ‘been inspired’ by their soup can - or is it Andy Warhol they’re copying?

Obviously they’ve been put on to PP’s product and are choosing to virtue-signal with this. And they’re banking on her not wanting to fight an expensive lawsuit when she’s got better things to be spending her time on. Hopefully Campbell’s will hear some opinions on this that won’t exactly be complimentary. They should really back off from hearing about one of their products being used to physically assault a woman. If they don’t, it will kind of look like they’re proud of this association. Do you think they are? Is there some young gun within their PR department that thinks this is fantastic publicity for their brand? Makes you wonder doesn’t it…

I'm inclined to think that it's just a copyright thing. Lots of corporations are quite fierce on this, even if it's silly.
Like Sainsbury's going after a little shop called Singhsburys.
And Vogue magazine threatening a pub (in a village called Vogue)

If Campbells are after a few more people to threaten with legal action they could go do a search on Etsy and see what comes up!

Isn't Campbell a US corporation?

I'm not sure they'll be bothered about any possible loss of sales in the UK.

In the US, they can spin it as "standing up to gender bigots". US corps just love a bit of rainbow washing

Good point

Good on her for getting publicity over it

I have the soup postcard in my living room window, opposite the police station!
It's been there for ages.

I'm buying a couple of bits from the SFW site this morning. Got my eye on a suffragette t-shirt.

Well won't be buying Campbell's soup in the future that's for sure!

And yet lots of companies are just fine with selling misogyny. From letting men in the women's changing rooms (Primark, John Lewis) to encouraging binder use in girls (Lush) to denigrating a DA survivor (Body Shop).

They'd prefer to bully a woman than stand up for them.

KJK is a bloody genius, the marketing equivalent of a chess grandmaster.

Apparently we do have a copyright exemption for parody.

It's not like she is in direct competition with a soup company and has taken their profits.

I don't think any corporation, if they really think it through, wants to have itself associated with bullying women.

'Hey, our product is made by cowards, for a few bullies to use! The women who are supposed to actually buy it, to return a profit to the shareholders, well they can go fuck themselves!'

Nope, not really working for me as a top floor marketing strategy.

Anyway, glad Posie continues to get publicity. If I had the money I'd buy up all the remaining merch myself.

Parodies of women, fill your boots.
Parodies of soup!?