Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: PierreVandevenne on March 24, 2011, 05:47:11 am
-
lose $10.000.000 plus lawyer's expenses
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/23/richard-prince-artwork-copyright-breach
I liked the title "lucrative artwork", not "valuable artwork"
-
lose $10.000.000 plus lawyer's expenses
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/23/richard-prince-artwork-copyright-breach
I liked the title "lucrative artwork", not "valuable artwork"
Isn't he the same mother that ripped off old Marlboro ads and the original shooter got zilch? I think that's the first good sign regarding copyright that I've come across in a long time; I hope it makes those thieves quake in their own crap.
But then, until you can make the law appreciate the fragility of copyright, it will always be a battle for us creativos: random victories are not enough; it must be enshrined in law in such a way that the message is clear: steal, and thou shalt pay through thy nose.
Rob C
-
How is this different from some of Warhol's most famous work?
-
I hadn't realised he'd been made a saint.
Rob C
-
I hadn't realised he'd been made a saint.
Rob C
I didn't say so.
-
I didn't say so.
Oh, so you're Pope?
;-)
Rob C