ARTICLE
As we become engulfed in an increasingly technological world, particularly relating to art, it becomes easier and easier to steal images or even accidentally infringe on copyrights. This article addresses exactly that, and recent incidents in the current art world. Artist Kelley Walker, considered an "appropriation artist", creates art through taking images or work that someone else has created and reworking it as their own. This could mean 'sampling, quoting, borrowing, remixing, transforming or adapting' the work. This brings up concerns such as how altered does a work need to be from the original for it not to be considered stealing? Issues such as this need to be addressed with students in the upcoming technology age. Lessons can be based around this concept which will allow students to practice appropriation art, and follow guidelines to ensure avoiding lawsuits and learn about copyright laws/their complex technicalities.
It was also interesting that the article mentioned how some artists don't like the term "appropriation" and instead prefer the term “image transfer” because it 'more accurately describes the intentions of artists who sample imagery more freely.' The article also states, 'that in the past artists had to engage in a physical act—either engrave a plate or paint a canvas or make a collage or pick up a camera—to appropriate, whereas today images can simply be downloaded or scanned.'
Does the physical, real involvement of replicating an artwork they had to go through in the past make it less of an infringement on Copyright laws? Is there a difference between practicing a technique through replication and forging an artwork?
Ah, the age-old debate over copyrights. This brings to mind Napster, bands claiming other musicians stole their music, and artists like Kelley Walker. I have always felt that their is a central theme of morals and ethics at the heart of copyrights and the infringement thereof. While writing my lesson plans I have pulled multiple images from the internet, of master artworks as well as unknown contemporary art. My intent is to use them as teaching tools, complete with credits for the artists' works. If I wanted to incorporate these images into any work which I would call my own, I would feel obligated to contact the artist or foundation and ask for permission to alter their creations. It is a matter of the intent behind downloading the image. Yes, the internet enables misuse of copyrighted materials and unethical behavior. It's all about user responsibility and accountability. (As a side note, I recently created a professional website which will not appear in search engines, but be accessible with the direct URL only. The reason? I do not trust that my artwork will remain my own if it can be accessed by the entire population of the world. Artist's dilemma, indeed!)
ReplyDelete