Eric, brilliant and honest presentation of art, copyright and fair use. As a collage artist myself, appropriation is one of the tools I use, like butter on bread. Appreciate your clarity and honesty and humor. - Matthew Rose

Why didn't he reference Walter Benjamin at all?

@cwrigh13

8 жыл бұрын

why would he? he's taking about something completely different. the only similarity is the name.

@Loufi303

5 жыл бұрын

He talks about copyright and then 'steals' a very famous title (intellectual property?) without any reference? Lame. Thanks for mentioning it, phlogistoni - so i don't have to waste my time. I'm looking for a discussion of and elaboration on Benjamin's essay.

@mammi7699

Жыл бұрын

Same here. This guy is false advertising. If your topic is different, then dont use the exact same title.

Great lecture. Appropriation in art is always complicated, specially when the artists' work becomes more valuable (as in the actual price of the work) than the original material.

Thank you for this. Very informative.

In fact, Warhol paid for the rights to use most of his images--including the Campbell's Soup can and the Brillo Boxes. And Sherry Levine lost the rights to her own use of Walker Evans' image in the copyright courts. Read *Digital Prohibition: Piracy and Authorship in New Media Art* (Continuum, 2012) for an in-depth exploration of these issues and more.

"Digital Prohibition" doesn't appear to mention the soup cans. And I've not heard that claim about them before, although there is an appreciative letter to Warhol from someone at the company dating from after the show iirc.

I wonder if anyone can help me out. I made a film... me taking people on a tour of historic places in my town... I want to use historic photos but I'm afraid the museum who owns them will say no. If they say no, would my artist friend be allowed to draw these old buildings in the photos that the museum owns? I can check out a book that has all these photos in it and my friend could draw the buildings in the photos. The museum did not take the photos but they own these historic photos.

@KtO680

4 жыл бұрын

It sounds like you are making an educational film or are at least wanting to include these images for educational purposes. First advice I can offer is always ask permission or at least try to get the permission. Responses can be varied and sometimes take longer than desired but they can often come with, "Oh! You're interested in this? Well, have you seen these lesser known ones too? They are just as interesting and it would be nice to see them shared a bit more as well." Those are always a delight. If full-on education is your main concept, I'll repeat what my Visual Art professor told us: "Always do your utmost to give credit where credit is due, especially if you are monetizing in any way. 'All visual references are intended for educational purposes ONLY' is a ground cover safety net. Go on to list the sources of ALL visual references, even ones you own, and how to contact these sources for more info if such info was provided to you or is public already. Certain historical photos may have physical ownership but the image itself could be free to the public if it is published as such (public education), it's old enough, or it has public relevance (photos of an old public building like a court house). For example: I'm working on a historical project on my hometown about an event that happened in 1907. Many of these photos have been handed over to archive groups, like West Virginia Cultural and Heritage, but they are free to the public unless you want a physical print. To use them in my writing I only have to include that they are for educational reference only, where I got them from, how to get in contact with those sources, and that no infringements are intended. Still, ask permission as it is always the best first step and it may surprisingly help you more. The museum may even offer to sponsor you or get you in contact with others who will. Hope that helps and it wasn't too delayed. I also hope your project is everything you want it to be.

very interesting

he stole the name of Walter Benjamins very influential essay and then has the audacity to talk about copy right lmao

@hujuibertyu31

3 жыл бұрын

Benjamin died at 1940

Sad to see that in the age of photography and cinema art went so completely up it's own backside. Hopefully the next generation will embrace the nobility and beauty that only painting and sculpture can attain.

Since art is not democratic, the appropriation of art is also not democratic. Live with it.

What I find so interesting is how y hv these copy car artist, seem to strike a nerve at what is the limit ofcorporate ownership. Warhol shows how culture is influenced by mass media and factory production of goods. He had to copy the images to be able to say what he had to say.

@abbyrivers9971

4 жыл бұрын

And hé pair before being those image to the copyrighholders.

4:43 lichtenstein work is making lowbrow art into highbrow art and you say that's perfectly legal. Yet you can't make warhols highbrow art into lowbrow art merchandise. That's so contradicting and one sided.

Yeah your lucky. If you used my photography with out permission I would sue you. One from a media company and two as a gallery and three as a photographer.

@likeawhispr

9 жыл бұрын

You can sue poor people all day long but you will not successfully remedy the situation. Suing for copyright violation, is not a financially responsible option for most people, because you lose more in attorney/court fees than you do just sucking it up and changing the way you do business. So some part-time Walmart cashier lady uses your art work, and even sells a few hundred dollars of your work. You sue and technically win. Now tell me what happens next, because that is where people who sue, lose most of the time.

@abbyrivers9971

4 жыл бұрын

Yep I would ve sued as well. I agree with you Therichelicopter.

low art? what an institutionalist