White Temple designer displeased with chocolate box featuring image of his temple

Thailand’s national artist Chalermchai Kositpipat attacked a chocolate company that is using an image of his famous White Temple on their box without permission.

The 62-year-old artist displayed the chocolate box in question at a press conference yesterday. Produced by Lotte Shanghai Foods company in China and imported by a Thai company, the chocolate box features an image of the White Temple, or Wat Rong Khun, the famous art exhibit in Chiang Rai. The text “Wat Rong Khun” is clearly written on the box.

Chalermchai told the press that the chocolate is seen on shelves at airports, shopping malls, and supermarkets. It violates the copyright, and thus disrespects the creators who put their love and devotion into building the temple, he said.

The artist revealed that a representative of the aforementioned company has tried to negotiate with him by claiming that they obtained the permission to use the image from a photographer. However, Chalermchai thought it was a totally different matter, as they want to make profit out of the Thai temple.

“Wat Rong Khun belongs to the citizens of Thailand. Even my family does not have permission to make a business off of the temple,” Chalermchai said.

The visual artist said he never refuses to give permission if a charity asks, but those who want to make a profit off of Wat Rong Khun will have to “wait 50 years after his death,” for the work to automatically pass to the public domain.

Sanook reported that representatives from a related company have visited Chalermchai to apologize. A senior committee member responded with the classic excuse that they “didn’t know any better” and the company only wanted to feature images that represent Thai culture. 

Chalermchai scolded and denounced their action, but later agreed to settle the dispute when the company agreed to donate THB500,000 to a school for the blind in Chiang Rai and recall the chocolate boxes off the shelves.

The Copyright Act of Thailand does not count photographing of an architect work as an infringement of copyright. The act also allows some exception from infringement, or Fair Use, if it “does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interest of the artist.” By legal framework, it’s not clear if the company was in the wrong, but it was, of course, considered disrespectful to the artist.