21–30 of 47 posts
You couldn't, I couldn't, but he can.
The buyers aren't spending 90k for a print of an Instagram, they're spending 90k for Richard Prince's signature on the bottom. Richard Prince could appropriate anything at this point, make a very limited edition, sign it, and mint money. You couldn't, I couldn't, but he can.
I don't think I'd get away with that, so why should he?
The buyers aren't spending 90k for a print of an Instagram, they're spending 90k for Richard Prince's signature on the bottom. Richard Prince could appropriate anything at this point, make a very limited edition, sign it, and mint money. You couldn't, I couldn't, but he can.
Under your theory, assuming I was famous, could I make a copy of a movie, sign the DVD copy and sell it for $100 free and clear? I don't think I'd get away with that, so why should he?
Everything else is more or less secondary, both to the market and to the artist as product and manufacturer. In other words, a lost/settled/won lawsuit is not a liability for him.
Well...yes...this headline manages to be both true but a little off-point. By posting your photos on Instagram, you have definitely given a third-party (Instagram) the right to make copies and distribute your photos...yet, the photo still belongs to you, Instagram is quick to point out [1]. But the reselling of photos as described here is not particular to Instagram. It involves an artist who reappropriates them for…
The idea of what part of information is owned and what is shared is a concept that fascinates and bewilders me consistently. Art has all these emotional attachments to it, this personal affect, and not many stop to think that for some people, code - even mathematics, is exactly the same.
Why is there a difference between someone who posts a solution on the internet, versus someone who teaches a course and publishes a book, versus someone who traces a drawing using a projector for art? Public and cultural education, myth, and superstition, mostly. But in quantity and quality - these determine the success or failure of any venture business; even the start of a lifelong friendship.
How do people come to the thoughts they conclude with? How do people get ideas? I guarantee you, if you lock yourself up in a little room and wall yourself off from society, you will either arrive at some derivative of absolute truth or you will go insane, possibly both.
If I post this comment, and then other people have ideas that are profitable as a result of my comment, does it matter how similar their idea to my comment appears? Do I own those ideas that result from my comment? I would say no, because that's absurd, but yet, we live in a world that has opinions that cover the entire spectrum of this dialogue, and then some.
so if i publish a copyrighted material in my Instagram, an i or the publisher responsible? ... since they are the ones with the prospect of profit...
This would fall under the DMCA. So long as the publisher took down the material when notified it was an infringement, following their DMCA procedures.
The buyers aren't spending 90k for a print of an Instagram, they're spending 90k for Richard Prince's signature on the bottom. Richard Prince could appropriate anything at this point, make a very limited edition, sign it, and mint money. You couldn't, I couldn't, but he can.
Under your theory, assuming I was famous, could I make a copy of a movie, sign the DVD copy and sell it for $100 free and clear? I don't think I'd get away with that, so why should he?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Under your theory, assuming I was famous, could I make a copy of a movie, sign the DVD copy and sell it for $100 free and clear? I don't think I'd get away with that, so why should he?
What if I bought the DVD, got it signed by you and sold it for $100? Replace DVD with guitars, T-Shirts etc, definitely seen that happening.
I guess the big question is does what he has done to the images count as derivative works or not? I say not, since he's used the image unmodified.
I hope at $90k a sale it catches the attention of a pro bono for a nice test case. Would be interesting to see what the courts say.
I find it fascinating that trivial modifications of photos qualify as 'transformative' and thus evade copyright. So it's okay for me to download the new Taylor Swift single, add some extra reverb, and start selling copies of it? Cool.
So a couple different things here: On one hand, it's funny that user "doedeere" thinks she had to give permission to the artist in order to use her picture in art. Gives off an air of entitlement if you ask me. On the other, I think it's a fair example of how little the average user is aware (read: doesn't give any attention to at all) of a free service's TOS and what is/isn't allowed, in addition the actual nature o…
[1] http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/#...