mnartists.org

Home » Forum Home » Past Features » Legal Live

Topic: Legal Live
Replies: 109   Pages: 8   Last Post: Aug 11, 2005 3:09 PM by: jaime longoria

Reply to this Topic
Search Forum

Back to Topic List
Replies: 109   Pages: 8   [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Next ]
Richert

Posts: 2
Registered: Mar 1, 2004
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 3, 2005 8:10 PM
  Reply

Thank you,

Mary, Glenn, Walter and Jon.

Kathleen

Colin Rusch

Posts: 1,435
Registered: Oct 16, 2002
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 3, 2005 8:10 PM
  Reply

Just an FYI, this forum will be available for continued discussion. So, please check back in.

Colin

LEHMANN STROBEL PLC

Posts: 22
Registered: Feb 24, 2005
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 3, 2005 8:10 PM
  Reply

I am always happy to talk with people about their projects and how we might be able to help them. 651-221-0424. Walter G Lehmann

tim cameron

Posts: 4
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 3, 2005 8:12 PM
  Reply

Mary, thanks for your help. I'll document the ideas.

I'm interested in creating a very specific kind of installation. It's a piece that I think could work in many cities outside of the Twin Cities, and in other countries. I foresee some danger of copycatting. If I am working with one location at a time, how can I insure that future installations aren't prempted in Berlin or Osaka, etc.?

thanks ALL!

Jon Garon

Posts: 23
From: Hamline University School of Law
Registered: Feb 24, 2005
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 3, 2005 8:12 PM
  Reply

Thank you to everyone who posted. I enjoyed being invited to participate.

jon

Colin Rusch

Posts: 1,435
Registered: Oct 16, 2002
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 3, 2005 8:15 PM
  Reply

I think there are still a few more posts coming, but I want to thank all of our guests for sharing their time and expertise. And thank you to everyone who logged in, asked questions, and tracked the conversation.

Colin

LEHMANN STROBEL PLC

Posts: 22
Registered: Feb 24, 2005
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 3, 2005 8:15 PM
  Reply

It's a conference for documentary film-makers which is held in Washington DC each February. This year there were over 1000 producers from around the world. The cable distributors are also well represented. There is a pre-conference series of masterclasses and a variety of topics presented during the conference. Anyone who is thinking about producing documentary or factual programming will learn alot about the industry. There is a link from our website to the conference web site. The company that hosts it also puts out a magazine called RealScreen.

LEHMANN STROBEL PLC

Posts: 22
Registered: Feb 24, 2005
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 3, 2005 8:16 PM
  Reply

It's a conference for documentary film-makers which is held in Washington DC each February. This year there were over 1000 producers from around the world. The cable distributors are also well represented. There is a pre-conference series of masterclasses and a variety of topics presented during the conference. Anyone who is thinking about producing documentary or factual programming will learn alot about the industry. There is a link from our website to the conference web site. The company that hosts it also puts out a magazine called RealScreen.

Mary Madden

Posts: 11
From: Washington, D.C.
Registered: Feb 24, 2005
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 3, 2005 8:16 PM
  Reply

Thanks to Kathleen and Colin for organizing this--I've learned a lot tonight! If anyone would like to email me with any further questions or comments, you can connect with me at: www.pewinternet.org

Christopher Bailey Foote

Posts: 2
Registered: Mar 7, 2005
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 7, 2005 11:15 AM
  Reply

I wonder if you could address the issue of "appropriation?"

In major art publications the concept is treated simply as another tool in the creative arsenal. Artists like Rauschenberg, Johns and Warhol used other peoples' photos, brand labels and celebrity images in their collages, assemblages and screen print "paintings" with seemingly few if any legal repercussions.

Were those artists able to avoid legal issues by appropriating portions of creative works (as opposed to the whole), and transforming them enough so that legal restrictions did not apply? Or, have we become more aggressive in the protection of copyrights in recent years?

Bob Schulz

Posts: 416
From: Brooklyn Park, MN
Registered: Aug 15, 2003
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 7, 2005 2:24 PM
  Reply

Can't parody trump

Ray Rolfe

Posts: 3,263
From: Northeast Minneapolis
Registered: Sep 5, 2001
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 7, 2005 6:01 PM
  Reply

""""Try putting a pair of Golden Arches in a painting, or even writing it in a sentence. Or a Nike swish mark. You will get a letter in the mail so fast your head will spin."""""

Great Idea! I should try this. Getting sued by Nike or McDonalds would be a great career move.

Christopher Bailey Foote

Posts: 2
Registered: Mar 7, 2005
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 8, 2005 3:23 PM
  Reply

I attended an artists' reception followed by a panel discussion a few months ago where the featured artists had hung their work in the meeting space. Two or three of the artists were using collage techniques involving printed materials and images taken from the internet.

When, during the Q & A session, I asked their opinions on the issue of "appropriation" everyone looked at me as if I were from another planet. The general consensus was that artists had always appropriated material; therefore it was an acceptable practice.

The majority of these artists were university professors (I won't say which), who, ostensibly, should know the legal implications of unauthorized use.

The whole thing is a little baffling, I must admit. There seems to be quite a rift between the legal viewpoint and the creative viewpoint. Some artists liberally use bits and pieces of other people's work with freedom of conscience and from legal repercussions, which leads me to wonder if there is some blurry middle ground where appropriation is acceptable, or if it's simply a matter of whether the original owner of the appropriated material is aware, or sufficiently motivated to enforce copyright protection.

Ray Rolfe

Posts: 3,263
From: Northeast Minneapolis
Registered: Sep 5, 2001
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 10, 2005 2:57 PM
  Reply

The majority of these artists were university professors (I won't say which), who, ostensibly, should know the legal implications of unauthorized use.

Double whammy there! Artists AND professors. Aldo Moroni once, joking in a newspaper, said teaching good gig cause he gets to steal ideas from his students. Heh.

Something can be said here about data-mining too. As quickly as a thinking + typing artist can generate new ideas for products, designs, concepts or anything potentialy profitable, it can be harvested by huge companies with unlimited resorces to grow fruit from "appropreated" seeds. That makes copywrite more importaint to the innovators, providing a window of time before public domain happens.

I'm on a university computer so those are my thoughts after checking out whats new at the New Media Studies Institute. GRAVEL has an expertise database(!!!!!) with no content ()

Gregg S. Reed

Posts: 10
Registered: Jan 13, 2005
Re: Legal Live
Posted: Mar 19, 2005 3:01 AM
  Reply

When artists "appropriate" celebrity images, they might be using the images of public figures. Faces might be in the public domain, like images from a landscape--signs, buildings, and cars, for example. Some things aren't copyrightable, from games to instructions. And some creators don't copy right every thing--they need to register a copy right within 5 years of publishing the work to have a copyright they can enforce. But the copyright starts with the creation of the work, even without registration. So creators can wait as long as five years to register. If own an original photograph or art work, I think I can also reproduce it.

Replies: 109   Pages: 8   [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Next ]
Back to Topic List