[NetBehaviour] Cariou vs. Prince: THE COPYRIGHT BUNGLE
rob at robmyers.org
Sat Apr 2 18:37:10 CEST 2011
On 02/04/11 17:04, bob catchpole wrote:
> On 02/04/11 14:01, Rob Myers wrote:
>>(Documentary photography) is also, as any judge can see, simply a
>>reproduction of other people's property to the extent that it
>>competently reproduces a recognizable image of it.
> So there!... Diane Arbus, Bill Brandt, August Sander, Josef Koudelka,
> Dorothea Lange et al
I then wrote:
> If we apply the same standard to documentary photography that we are
> being asked to apply to other art, not only is it not art but it
> should be seized and destroyed and its subjects or their descendants
> compensated by the photographer or their estate.
> This may seem ridiculous, but that's only because it is.
> Both in the case of documentary photographers and in the case of
My point is that I do not think we should treat either documentary
photographers or appropriation artists in this way, and that thinking
about how documentary photographers would fare under the same standards
as Prince is a good way of seeing why doing so is absurd.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the NetBehaviour