Posts Tagged ‘copyright & intellectual property’
The Getty has announced that it is lifting restrictions on the use of images to which the Getty holds all the rights or are in the public domain. According to Getty President and CEO Jim Cuno, “the Getty makes available, without charge, all available digital images to which the Getty holds all the rights or that are in the public domain to be used for any purpose.” The Open Content Program will make approximately 4600 images of paintings, drawings, manuscripts, photographs, antiquities and sculpture and decorative arts from the J. Paul Getty Museum available in high resolution on the Getty’s Search Gateway for use without restriction. The Getty plans to add other images, until eventually all applicable Getty-owned or public domain images are available, without restrictions, online.
On the Open Content Program’s website, the Getty explains their decision: “we recognized the need to share images of works of art in an unrestricted manner, freely, so that all those who create or appreciate art—scholars, artists, art lovers, and entrepreneurs—will have greater access to high-quality digital images for their studies and projects. Art inspires us, and imagination and creativity lead to artistic expressions that expand knowledge and understanding. The Getty sincerely hopes that people will use the open content images for a wide range of activities and that they will share the fruits of their labors with others.
Wikipedia will black out its English-version site today in protest of two anti-piracy bills, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the ProtectIP Act (PIPA), now under review in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate respectively. SOPA and PIPA are directed at websites involved in copyright infringement but they also include anti-circumvention provisions that will allow the government to target sites provide information that could assist users’ trying to circumvent these bills’ censorship mechanisms. Trevor Timm, writing for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, argues that this provision “would not only amount to an unconstitutional prior restraint against protected speech, but would severely damage online innovation. And contrary to claims by SOPA’s supporters, this provision—at least what’s been proposed so far—applies to all websites, even those in the U.S.”
In addition to Wikipedia, Google, Yahoo and Facebook have expressed their opposition to SOPA and PIPA. In contrast, organizations and companies such as the Museum Picture Association of America (MPAA) to Pfizer Inc. and Harley-Davidson Motor Company defend the bills as a much needed attempt to control rogue websites trafficking in everything from stolen movies to prescription drugs.
To read more:
Wikipedia’s Press Release and their administrative statement — “SOPA initiative/Action”
H.R. 3261 – Stop Online Piracy Act
S. 968 – Protect IP Act
PCWorld, “SOPA and PIPA: Just the Facts”
Trevor Timm (Electronic Frontier Foundation), “How PIPA and SOPA Violate White House Principles Supporting Free Speech and Innovation”
The Visual Resources Association (VRA) has released a statement on “The Fair Use of Images for Teaching, Research, and Study.” The statement focuses on 6 types of image uses regularly confronting academic users: preservation and transferring images to new formats for preservation purposes; use of image for teaching purposes (be it face-to-face teaching or non-synchronous teaching); use of images in course websites or other online study materials; adaptions of images for teaching and classroom work by students; sharing images among education and cultural institutions to facilitate teaching and study; and reproduction of images in theses and dissertations. The statement aims to address uncertainties and misconceptions surrounding the fair use doctrine as it relates to new technologies and media, the sometime overly conservative and restrictive policies of campus legal gatekeepers, and copyright litigation in non-academic contexts.
On October 4th, the Supreme Court heard arguments in the Golan v. Holder case — a case challenging the 1994 Uruguay Round Agreements Act. This act significantly limited the public domain when it restored the copyrights in the United States of many foreign works that previously had been freely available. Major works such as Picasso’s ‘Guernica’ and Fritz Lang’s ‘Metropolis’ lost their public-domain status as a result of this act. In a New York Times editorial, Peter Decherney, professor of film studies at the University of Pennsylvania, argues that the U.S. Congress went too far in 1994 and that the effects of this act on artists, filmmakers and students has been very damaging. To read the complete editorial, click here.
For more on Golan v. Holder, listen to Professor Edward Lee (IIT Chicago, Kent College of Law) on the Oyez Project or read these articles and discussions in the Chronicle of Higher Education, October 5, 2011 and May 29, 2011.
Artnet News announced yesterday that the Dia Foundation is finalizing an agreement with the Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands over the lease of the 10-acres of state owned land on which Robert Smithson’s Spiral Jetty is situated. The Dia is establishing a Special Use Lease with Utah after its 20-year lease expired in February amid rumors that the foundation failed to make payments and was on the verge of loosing control of the seminal earthwork.
The issue of ownership and control of the iconic earthwork is a fascinating study in itself. If you want to read more, go to the Salt Lake Tribune (June 23, 2011 and July 22, 2011) , the Hyperallergic blog (June 14, 2011 and August 6, 2011) and Artinfo.
Keith Aoki, the Professor of Law from UCD’s King Hall who was known for his ability to turn “his artistic talents into a powerful tool for battling overzealous copyright laws,” died this past April at the age of 55. Professor Aoki earned a bachelor’s and master’s degree in fine art and drew underground cartoons in New York City before enrolling at Harvard Law School. After graduating, Mr. Aoki practiced law, focusing on technology law, for 2 years in Boston before moving on to a teaching career at the University of Oregon and UC Davis. Mr. Aoki was a strident and creative defender of digital freedom. He is known for his briefs defending the non-profit Electronic Frontier Foundation and Bound by Law? Tales From the Public Domain (Duke U. Press, 2006), a cartoon he wrote and illustrated about a documentary filmmaker confronting copyright restrictions as she attempts to make a film.
The UCD School of Law is conducting a memorial for Aoki — “Remembering Keith Aoki” — on May 26 at 3:00 pm in King Hall. Additional tributes on Professor Aoki: the School of Law at UC Davis, The Public Domain and The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Taking a sharply different view of Copyright and Fair Use from Falzone and Ahrens (see previous post) is Veronique Wiesinger in her just published editorial in ARTINFO titled “Copyright Protection Is Not an Artistic Hurdle But a Legal Right.” Wiesinger is the Giacometti Foundation director who recently rejected John Baldessari’s request to duplicate a Giacometti sculpture for one of his installations. Baldesarri went ahead with his installation as planned and the Foundation is now taking him to court for violating the their request. Wiesinger argues that “intellectual property law is largely ignored by the art world” today and that Fair Use is “brandished in order to make money in the name of culture and education. Go here to read Wiesinger’s complete Op-ed.
YouTube and the Center for Internet and Society are hosting a Fair Use question and answer session. From YouTube Blog: “Fair use is a legal term that grants creators an exception to the strict copyright that the original content owner controls — in layman’s terms, it’s the idea that as long as the use is “fair,” someone can reference part of someone else’s work for parody, scholarly reasons, or more.
What constitutes “fair use” is a complicated issue and one that we get asked about quite often. So we’ve asked two leading experts from the Stanford Center for Internet and Society (CIS), Anthony Falzone and Julie Ahrens, to help answer your questions.”
Anthony Falzone and Julie Ahrens, Executive Directors of the Fair Use Project, will be accepting questions until April 21 through Google Moderator. On May 2 they will answer questions on video and re-post the questions/answers on their CIS blog. Google Moderator will also allow you to vote on other questions you hope to have answered by Falzone and Ahrens.
According to a federal court judge in New York, artist Richard Prince and the Gagosian Gallery infringed on photographer Patrick Cariou’s copyrights when Prince produced “Canal Zone,” a series of 29 paintings taken from Cariou’s book titled Yes, Rasta. Prince created collages and paintings from photographs — details but also some “used in their entirety or nearly so” — torn from Cariou’s book. Prince’s maintained that Cariou’s photographs were “‘mere compilations of facts…arranged with minimum creativity…[and] are therefore not protectable’ by copyright law,” and that his transformation of Cariou photographs through his appropriation is protected under the doctrine of “fair-use.” The judge rejected Prince’s defense, refering to the Rogers v. Koons case: “If an infringement of copyrightable expression could be justified as fair use solely on the basis of the infringer’s claim to a higher or different artistic use . . . there would be no practicable boundary to the fair use defense.” Fair Use permits copyrighted works to be used without permission under certain provisions, in particular criticism, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. Prince has been ordered by the court to destroy all the infringing works. To read more, go to the complete March 21 pdn article.