Famous Protest Art Group In Bulgaria Paint Their Feelings About New EU Copyright Law On Gutenberg Statue

from the art-to-save-art dept

The brave new path to a gatekeeper-manned, non-open internet the EU recently cut with its plainly atrocious new copyright directive was, were you to believe the general media coverage, cheered on by EU artists as a blow to Google and a boon to art because… well, nobody can actually explain that last part. And that’s likely because the proposed new legislation, Article 11 and Article 13, essentially forces internet platforms to play total copyright cops or be liable for infringement while gutting the fair use type allowances that had previously been in place. Much of the European legislation that existed on the national level, and which served as the basis for this continental legislation, has done absolutely zero to provide artists or journalists any additional income. Instead, it’s re-entrenched legacy gatekeepers and essentially created a legal prohibition on innovation. As the directive goes through its final stages for adoption by EU member states, the general coverage has repeated the line that artists and creators are cheering this on.

But, despite the media coverage, it isn’t true that all of the artistic world is blind to exactly what was just done to the internet and the wider culture. Destructive Creation — a collection of artists most famous for taking a monument in Europe to Soviet soldiers and painting them all as western superheroes and cultural icons — has made its latest work an addition to a statue of Johannes Gutenberg.

“Let there be light”, reads the cover of the Bible held by the bronze hands of Johannes Gutenberg, inventor of the modern printing press, on the famous statue in Place Gutenberg in Strasbourg, France. Last weekend, however, the monument received a curious addition. A dazzling red sign reads CENSORED above a caption that reads “Art. 13”.

A member of Bulgarian art collective, Destructive Creation, which was behind the artistic action, defended the stunt.

“Under the proposed regulations, if Gutenberg was doing now what he was doing in the 15th century, he would be sued for using content that does not belong to him – the Bible, which he reprinted – and would have been censored,” the artist told BIRN.

And here is their work upon the statue.

As far as making points goes, slapping the law you believe will censor art on the bible being held by the man that brought mass printing to Europe certainly is on the nose. But the actual important factor in this is that this wasn’t Silicon Valley tech shareholders that defaced the statue in the name of saving art and culture, but a group of artists. These are the exact people who, were you to listen to proponents of the new copyright law, would be on their knees thanking their gracious overlords. Instead, Destructive Creation knows exactly where this is all going to lead and it most certainly isn’t going to be to an EU where artists have more opportunities to make, share, and sell their art. Instead, the law will chill permissive sharing by artists, not to mention individuals and companies that want to build new and innovative platforms to help art reach the public, all under the threat of massive liability that practically mandates platforms disallow user-generated content.

You know, what the internet has essentially always been until this EU bill has decided to kill it.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Famous Protest Art Group In Bulgaria Paint Their Feelings About New EU Copyright Law On Gutenberg Statue”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

I don’t if he’s serious anymore or if he simply decided to give up and have a psychotic break instead.

Either way, he should know you don’t use oh that way in a written medium as it has no impact without voice or facial expression. It also makes whatever is written alongside subject to far more interpretations than it otherwise would have.

That being said, I’m choosing to interpret his words as lyrics.

Gary (profile) says:

Re: Re: Infinity minus 1

Nope, just checked and several people told me their deity wrote it, and isn’t dead. So the copyright is in dispute and no one can use it until the court case is settled.

(Several cult-factions swear that every single word was written by their deity thru human intermediaries acting as transcriptionists not authors – thus the books is the literal, actual, word of an invisible being who currently may or may not be dead.)

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Infinity minus 1

Interesting, because there are so many discrepancies and contradictions within said book it is difficult to believe it was written by only one person as that person would then have multiple personalities. It is almost as if it were written by many who wanted to document all the stories told around the campfires .. and then it was rewritten, and then it was rewritten, and then it was rewritten, and then it was rewritten …..

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...