Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
What do y'all think about visual artists who use collage-type techniques in their work? For example artists (whose names I won't list here) who use commercial advertisements, national icons, media characters, brand names, etc... as part of a mixed media painting? Or sculpture (I recall one friend who nailed a mangled MacIntosh keyboard into a piece of sculpture and burned it and then exhibited the remains)? Would that person be obligated to ask Apple for permission? I'd think that that's a rare (if ever) occurrence. Is there 'theft of image' here? Kim Flint <kflint@chromatic.com> on 08/26/98 03:53:28 AM Please respond to Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com To: Loopers-Delight@annihilist.com cc: (bcc: Edward Chang/AMS/AMSINC) Subject: Re: Fwd: FNV-RIAA IS CRACKING DOWN At 01:37 AM 8/26/98 -0500, mark sottilaro wrote: >As a creator of original music I find nothing wrong with this at all. > I used that argument in 1986, and I have not granted you permission to use it. You will be hearing from my crack legal team shortly! But really, I think you would have a difficult time arguing that the zillions of recordings being made in the numerous collage-based genres, using samples, are all unoriginal. Negativland makes a very good point about the Fair Use principles of copyright law, and the rights granted therein. Fair Use has always been a part of the law, but there are not many precedent cases available to define it very well. So the situation is a bit vague, there aren't any solid legal guidelines to follow, and now advances in digital media are pushing the issue to a head. I would imagine that with big record companies and the RIAA aggressively threatening people with lawsuits to make them give up their fair use rights, it won't be long before we see more of this being tried in the courts. Anyway, Negativland convinced me of all this several years ago. They have been making the fair use case quite eloquently for many, many years, and I'd suggest checking out what they have to say before making reactionary statements. Most people don't have a very good grasp on what copyright law is all about, even when they think they do (like confusing copyright with property rights), and even fewer know what Fair Use is. It's a worthwhile thing to learn, rather than assume.... Negativland is also a really cool experimental-noise-found sound music group, not to mention master media artists. Nobody writes press releases as well as they do! they've turned this whole Fair Use crusade into a media art project in and of itself, which is quite fun to follow. Their book "Fair Use: the Story of the Letter U and the Numeral 2" is geat, chronicling their experiences getting almost sued off the planet by U2, Casey Casem, and Island Records, because of a sample on a record. (you might never get to hear the original version, but the song is extremely funny....) Of course that is the same U2 that samples local news broadcasts and tv shows during their stadium concerts, and manipulates them on their giant video screen, without seeking permission from the local tv stations. Apparently their lawyers lack the gene for Irony. Negativland is here, they can speak for themselves just fine: http://www.negativland.com/ kim _________________________________________________________ Kim Flint, MTS kflint@chromatic.com Chromatic Research 408-752-9284 http://www.chromatic.com