RSS
The Warholian Dichotomy To Intellectual Property
from the does-that-make-sense? dept
Larry Lessig has an article in the latest issue of Wired Magazine where he discusses how amazed he is that the foundation established following Andy Warhol's death has a semi-enlightened policy towards people using Warhol's work. How "enlightened?" Basically, if you're an artist or a "scholar" they don't bug you very much. For commercial users, however, they are extremely strict. This is enlightened? Wasn't that exactly part of what fair use was supposed to protect in the first place? It's a pretty sad statement when such a policy is considered so surprising that it's worth writing about.
4 Comments | Leave a Comment..
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Rep. Doyle Introduces Bill To Provide Public Access To Publicly Funded Research
- Beware Of Those Who Claim They're 'Saving The Culture Business' When They're Really Protecting Those Who Strip Artists Of Rights
- The Rise Of The 'Professional Amateur' And The Fall Of Gated, Exclusionary 'Clubs'
- OK Go Shows, Once Again, How Content Is Advertising... And How There Are Many Revenue Streams For Musicians
- We're Living In the Most Creative Time In History
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
No Subject Given
The corporations would try to make money by using images of those artists and their work. Look at the shameless campaign that Apple did using Einstein and Warhol.
Individuals wouldn't do that.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
Maybe you mean public-domain? Which Warhol's work isn't considered part of yet. A lot of Disney's is though. Well it isn't but should be.
I think the author of the article was just expressing what a "breath of fresh air" it is to see permission being granted free of censorship in this litigious age of content and intellectual property.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Fair Use
Mike seems to be pointing out how sad it is that the warhol foundation's stance on use of his work is seen as enlightened. The stance they take is exactly what fair use was before the corporate financed changes to copyright laws. Anyone could use copyrighted material for noncommercial purposes.
I agree it is a nice thing to see fair use from the warhol foundation since they don't have to grant it. However, it's pretty sad copyright holders have the power to kill ANY use of their material, commercial or not.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Fair Use
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment