> Yes, the other cases ARE different - there were
> frivolous lawsuits instigated. (I'm not sure what
> "little less blabla" means - not as talkative?)
More established. As far as I know, I asked this when seeing fluxus.de, an
advertising (?) company, never anyhow active in a greater public (unlike
fluxus "going public" in france..), you just need somebody with economic
interests in the "label", if the label gets hurd when somebody else uses
it. IMHO this is the case here, no matter if telekom and art are different
markets.. So the only problem would be to find somebody who is willing to
sue. He could start with a letter to FranceNet saying, that it is not ok
to use the label. And he should be a person with some strong connection to
the fluxus group. I dont think its neccesary that he owns the label, it
should be enough if there is a group, that owns it (in an untechnical way)
and that he is a member.
A letter, signed by some artists like Knizak etc, would cost nothing.
Everybody knows Fluxus, knows at least that there is some artmovement
("isnt it an artmovement ?"), but maybe not much longer. And this is also
something of economic value......
Btw, today, I heard that Charlotte Moorman died of the toxic radiosity of
video tubes and that Nam June Paik is very ill, very bad health etc..
Sorry for my poor english, maybe the Beuys widow.....who was/is very keen
on destruction of "wrong Beuys artpieces", maybe somebody else, the best
would be to sue them in some kind of group action, dont know if that
should be a small or a bigger group.
Heiko
Btw, its extremly lame to call a company "fluxus". There are a lot of new
names, global brands. Its like the ISP who called himself tcpip.....
