Fiat has had nothing but trouble from its 500C commercial featuring Jennifer Lopez. After enduring a body double scandal and reports that the vehicle actually broke down during filming, Chrysler then found itself in the crosshairs of a lawsuit. The artists behind a copyrighted mural in the Bronx sued the automaker for using the image without their permission, but The New York Times now reports that the two parties have settled their differences out of court. Neither side is disclosing the details of the settlement at this time, but Fiat and artists TATS Cru have conveniently announced a new collaboration.

Fiat will provide the artists with a 500 to be painted and then auctioned off at a later date for charity, though no one is saying whether the group received any compensation for the use of its artwork in the Jennifer Lopez ad. Hit the jump to check out the ad in question for yourself.



I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 341 Comments
      lorenzo
      • 3 Years Ago
      Why is AB so obsessed with this ad? Body double scandal? Wasnt shot in NYC scandal? Car broke down scandal? And now this, a grafiti artist notices his work in a tv ad and parlays that into a paying gig to do a whole car for a huge brands spanking new product. Scandal! Did Zach used to work at the Enquirer, where everything is a scandal?
        • 3 Years Ago
        @lorenzo
        [blocked]
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 3 Years Ago
        @lorenzo
        Why is AB so obsessed with the Chrysler ads, or anything UAW related? It's because they tend to get a lot of hits. They get people to comment, and then come back to check the site to see if anyone has responded to them, and see how many "up" or "down" votes they have received. In other words, AB is "obsessed" with anything that they know will generate a lot of emotional responses from people.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      nannymel
      • 3 Years Ago
      Is the art legal? Did the artist have permission to paint it there? If so Fiat should have green screened it and put something else in it's place. If it's not legal, then I don't see any grounds for them being sued. I think the art is quite ugly anyway.
      samagon0
      • 3 Years Ago
      the outcome is good enough, paint a car and auction it. dude probably got what he wanted (sites like this one to talk about it so we knew it existed), and fiat doesn't lose by giving to charity. only problem is the guy sounds like a douche for trying to profit from something (albeit copyrighted) that is prominently displayed in public. I have absolutely no desire to support this artist in any fashion.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      ghpianoman
      • 3 Years Ago
      Sorry.. if your "Art" is graffiti in full view on a public street... then you should not have the right to sue if your art happens to appear on an advertisement. Graffiti should be public domain. You want rights to your art, don't draw it on a giant wall or building where everyone in the area is forced to look at it whether they want to or not. They were filming on a public street. The fact that your art was on that street is the artist's problem, not those filming in public domain. I wouldn't have settled for even a dime.
      CinemaDude
      • 3 Years Ago
      Fiat should have held it's gound and just cut the shot and not paid the greedy bastards a penny.
      Just an observation
      • 3 Years Ago
      Doesn't anyone READ an article before commenting?! It says that a group of ARTISTS have the image copyrighted, so obviously, they had permission to place the mural there. It does NOT say that a group of misfits painted graffiti on a random wall.
        tlozaw
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Just an observation
        Why would registering a copyright designate that permission was given? Even if it was, copyright has nothing to do it.
        janetmayne
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Just an observation
        Thank you.
      crjkster
      • 3 Years Ago
      your artwork has now been seen by millions of people................sue???? you should be thankful.
      canduit14u
      • 3 Years Ago
      well thats bull ! if you dont want something looked at , dont paint it outside on a wall on a public street !
      adrastia9
      • 3 Years Ago
      The mural in in a public place. It's not sequestered away in some vault. I'm sure this isn't the first time some artist's mural was seen on TV. People need to stop seeing dollar $igns everywhere. Isn't art supposed to be for everybody? Once it's displayed in public it's no longer yours alone.
      Star
      • 3 Years Ago
      Why do you need a body double for a car comercial???
    • Load More Comments
    Advertisement
    2015 Ford Mustang
    MSRP: $23,800 - $46,170
    2015 Toyota Highlander
    MSRP: $29,665 - $44,040
    2015 Jeep Cherokee
    MSRP: $23,095 - $30,895
    2015 Subaru Forester
    MSRP: $22,195 - $33,095
    2015 Honda Accord
    MSRP: $22,105 - $33,630
    Advertisement