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

[IwantToRetire]

Multi-national food giant Campbell’s has threatened a women’s rights campaigner with legal action over a fundraising mug depicted in the style of a soup can.

The America-based firm - which boasts £7.5billion revenue a year- fired a threatening missive to Kellie-Jay Keen, 49, over items she sells on her Adult Human Female store.

They include a cup which bear’s the lettering ‘Posie’s courage tomato soup’ and an email badge featuring a cartoon tin.

Campbell's legal letter arrived last week and ordered her to stop using what it described as its 'soup can imagery' by September 22.

Mother-of-four Ms Keen decided to do a tin parody design after she had the liquid food thrown over her during a speaking tour of New Zealand.

She told MailOnline: 'I was surprised to receive the legal letter, it's always feels like a bit of a boot on the neck when a big corporation goes after you.

'I think it's scary that large corporations think it's better optics for their organisation to target women's rights campaigners.'

Full story in the DM (of course!) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12512799/Kellie-Jay-Keen-threatened-legal-action-Campbells-Soup.html

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

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

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

Got it. Thank you!