[NetBehaviour] Cariou vs. Prince: THE COPYRIGHT BUNGLE

Rob Myers 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
> mechanical
>>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
> Prince.

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.

- Rob.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20110402/88e1d787/attachment.sig>


More information about the NetBehaviour mailing list