BATMAN, interrupted

I just read an except from Lawrence Lessig's book "The Future of Ideas." I found this to be interesting:

“Ten years ago,” Guggenheim explains, “if incidental artwork . . . was recognized by a common person,” then you would have to clear its copyright. Today, things are very different. Now “if any piece of artwork is recognizable by anybody . . . then you have to clear the rights of that and pay” to use the work. “[A]lmost every piece of artwork, any piece of furniture, or sculpture, has to be cleared before you can use it.”

To put this in perspective, Lessig provided examples of the impact this change has had on the filmaking industry.

The film Twelve Monkeys was stopped by a court twenty-eight days after its release because an artist claimed a chair in the movie resembled a sketch of a piece of furniture that he had designed.

The movie Batman Forever was threatened because the Batmobile drove through an allegedly copyrighted courtyard and the original architect demanded money before the film could be released.

In 1998, a judge stopped the release of The Devil’s Advocate for two days because a sculptor claimed his art was used in the background. These events teach the lawyers that they must control the filmmakers.

From what I gather after reading the excerpt, Lessig's premise is that creativity is dramatically affected if a creator/director's vision for a film is watered down by what objects the lawyers say can appear in the film.

I can see that being true. What I wonder is why an individual would sue a filmaker if their work appeared in the background of some movie. I mean, companies PAY filmakers to have their product appear in a movie while some random person who designed a chair, and could stand to get a great deal of publicity from having that chair appear in a movie, sues in order to get money from the filmaker.

Take a look at this:

*Lark cigarettes paid $350,000 to have their brand appear in the James Bond movie License to Kill.
*ET (1982)- The decision to feature Reese's Pieces in ET catapulted the product-placement craft into the Hollywood mainstream. Reese's Pieces leapt onto kids' mental menus and sales shot up 65%; Mars, the maker of M&Ms, had passed on the opportunity.
*The Firm (1993) - Placement can enhance brand value at strategic times. When Tom Cruise visits Gene Hackman in the Cayman Islands, Hackman suggests that he "grab a Red Stripe," so Cruise opens the fridge for a bottle of the Jamaican-brewed beer. Within a month of the film's release, Red Stripe sales in the U.S. had increased by more than 50%, and just a few weeks later, company owners sold a majority stake in their brewery for $62 million to Guinnesss Brewing Worldwide.

For more info on product placement in movies, click here!