Forbidden images -- polishing The Bean ...

[varjag]

Few, if any, would object to you taking a photo for your own enjoyment. But when you take it in order to sell it - you are stealing the rights of the artist who has every reason to expect that it is she who should commercially benefit from images or reproductions!

Nope.

When you take it in order to sell it, you don't "steal the rights"; the rights still belong to the author (or another owner if they were transferred). You may be violating the copyright, which is a civil offense; thieft OTOH is a criminal offense.

Oh, and the term "intellectual property" is just another fallacy: an attempt to lump together copyrights, trademarks and patents to make it look like they are same things. They're not.

Pardon my nitpicking 🙂

 

[hugivza]

A truly monorchic experience, a celebration of past lives: what one has been! Would that my epitaph was as shining and seamless!!

 

[RJBender]

Suppose that Cloud Gate is nothing more than an exact, large scale replica of a manufacturer's jelly bean and the manufacturer can prove all the dimensions of Cloud Gate are proportionally identical to their product. Can the artist still claim copyright to Cloud Gate? 😕

We should respect Anish Kapoor's rights as an artist, however, I don't see the artist grinding the welded seams and polishing the surfaces. This work is all being done by construction trade workers. According to the article I submitted in an earlier post, all the logistics are being handled by a metal working shop in California.

R.J.

 

[RJBender]

Nope.

When you take it in order to sell it, you don't "steal the rights"; the rights still belong to the author (or another owner if they were transferred). You may be violating the copyright, which is a civil offense; thieft OTOH is a criminal offense.

Oh, and the term "intellectual property" is just another fallacy: an attempt to lump together copyrights, trademarks and patents to make it look like they are same things. They're not.

Pardon my nitpicking 🙂

Eugene, the next time you watch a video or DVD read the FBI warning.

R.J.

 

[XAos]

Suppose that Cloud Gate is nothing more than an exact, large scale replica of a manufacturer's jelly bean and the manufacturer can prove all the dimensions of Cloud Gate are proportionally identical to their product. Can the artist still claim copyright to Cloud Gate? 😕
R.J.

Obviously not - the jelly bean is the commercial product of a large soulless oppressing evil corporation, and the blob is the noble artistic endeavour of a poor oppressed starving ARTIST.

 

[ch1]

Suppose that Cloud Gate is nothing more than an exact, large scale replica of a manufacturer's jelly bean and the manufacturer can prove all the dimensions of Cloud Gate are proportionally identical to their product. Can the artist still claim copyright to Cloud Gate? 😕

We should respect Anish Kapoor's rights as an artist, however, I don't see the artist grinding the welded seams and polishing the surfaces. This work is all being done by construction trade workers. According to the article I submitted in an earlier post, all the logistics are being handled by a metal working shop in California.

R.J.

Obviously with large installations there is a significant labor element involved that includes workers retained by the artist to carry out the artistic concept. I would presume that the artist here made a small-scale model of the artwork and then retained the metal working shop to 'scale up' the concept to the desired large size.

And remember, even the "old masters" had apprentices and assistants to fill in parts of their paintings etc.

With these large public installations the "art" is in the conception more so than the execution.

 

[djon]

RJ, NM's not more "draconian" than TX, but it's smarter. For example, we have more generous gun laws but far tougher cops. We have more drunk drivers than TX, but TX has more drunk fatalities: Texicans can't figure out seat belts.

Face it, people with cameras are pains in the patoot for everybody else, for the most part. I want gallery and theatre visitors to have a good time with the objects and performances, so I think those places should be VERY draconian.

I mourn the fact that laws and rules seem required: It's better when people simply take these things into their own hands: Photographers are usually fairly wimpy physically, I've observed. 😉




Originally Posted by djon
Flash takes away from the pleasure of others in galleries and museums and concerts. It's like cellphones in restaurants or farting in bed. It's crude and insensitive. Nobody who uses a flash in a gallery has any idea what he's photographing anyway. Drag him out and toss him in the street. Forty lashes.

Don't tell me your laws in New Mexico are more draconian than those in Texas?

R.J.
___________ 🙄

 

[derevaun]

It's worth pointing out that the artist's reserved rights to reproductions of his work are separate from the policy to restrict the privilege of taking photos of it. If there were no restrictions, Kapoor would still have cause against someone selling a photo, or using a photo to replace his own in the marketplace, etc. Restricting photos does preempt that kind of use somewhat, and it gives Kapoor a stronger case should it get past a Cease & Desist situation.

 

[RJBender]

I see this project as a "gazing globe" shaped like a jelly bean, fabricated and erected by skilled construction trade workers. What was the artist's role besides conceptualizing the project and finding the finances to construct it? I respect the rights of all artists, including this one, but I'm not at all impressed with this artist's creativity.

Suppose "cloud gate mania" sweeps Chicago and all the retailers want a piece of the lucrative tourist trade. I decide to sell balloons in my store made from silver mylar in the shape of a kidney bean... similar but not as chunky as the Cloud Gate "bean." Would I be infringing on Anish Kapoor's copyright? Can the shape of a bean be copyrighted? 😕
George, in one of your previous posts you said,

...it would be an interesting "test" case for someone with a tripod who is prohibited from taking a photo to file a lawsuit.

If I received a cease-and-desist order for selling the balloons, would this be a good test case?


R.J.

 

[RJBender]

...Face it, people with cameras are pains in the patoot for everybody else, for the most part. I want gallery and theatre visitors to have a good time with the objects and performances, so I think those places should be VERY draconian...

Djon, I believe we were complaining about cameras in public museums funded by tax payers. I would never take a camera into a gallery unless an artist had asked me to photograph her work. 🙂

R.J.