Court Rules That Richard Prince Ripped Off Patrick Cariou

[lxdude]

That is what I find most galling about Prince. He is willing, to protect himself and his income stream, to assert the works of another are without artistic merit until he modifies them, after which they are worth millions. He is an amoral scumbag charlatan.

 

[SuzanneR]

That is what I find most galling about Prince. He is willing, to protect himself and his income stream, to assert the works of another are without artistic merit until he modifies them, after which they are worth millions. He is an amoral scumbag charlatan.

Of course, you've got to wonder what kind of an idiot would separate themselves from a cool couple of million to own one. I don't think much of anyone throwing around that kind of cash to buy that kind of art.

 

[frotog]

Wow! How do you guys feel about Sherrie Levine?

As with all the pictures generation artists the concern is not with originality but rather with the multi-valence of the image and the cultural effects of its consumption. In regards to this relationship, Prince is a trickster and in many ways his work presages the debates surrounding originality, content and ownership that have been so prevalent in the digital era. What value you assign to Prince's artistic practice is really beside the point.

 

[frotog]

Moot point.

 

[Tom Stanworth]

Sounds like a fair verdict and I cannot see how it could ever have been in doubt really. It also represents a court's unwillingness to believe that, as one person put it, 'juvenile scribblings' constitutes a complete change and rework of the original. I have no sympathy for Prince whatsoever. After all, if Cariou's work was essentially a 'mere compilation of facts' the least Prince could have done was get off his @ss and produce his own 'mere compilation of facts' from which to work. Even if the originals were 'factual' they were Cariou's 'factual compilations.' Prince's legal position also suggests that a lay person cannot really claim to own something they made unless someone else (read lofty artist like Prince) regards it is 'sufficiently creative as to earn the status of a meaningful creation.' The arrogance is astonishing and as pretentious as the art world can be, I can't help but feel that prince has ruined his credibility in court. There is nothing cool about showing a total lack of respect for other people and the value of their work, while essential admitting you thought you set the value of other people's creations.... and can take at will those things you do not rate highly. For justice to be served, this ought to be the end of Prince's career.

 

[rcam72]

There's a better article here at PDN on-line:

http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/news/Appropriation-Artist-2241.shtml

Maybe misappropriation-artist from now on?

Raul

 

[Red Robin]

J can tell, I got in on this thread wa-a-a-y late.Is there a place a non-artist,some one like - well my self, is still able to view the offending pictures? Side by side?

 

[rcam72]

J can tell, I got in on this thread wa-a-a-y late.Is there a place a non-artist,some one like - well my self, is still able to view the offending pictures? Side by side?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/artinfo/french-photographer-patri_b_839619.html

Has some images side by side and a short interview with Cariou. If you Google "Prince and Cariou" more stories pop up, most have some images.

I like that Cariou isn't trying to cash in right away on the notoriety of the trial. In the above interview he says:

I'm not looking for instant recognition in my work. I'm trying
to make my work and be as good as I can be, and then let it grow
into what it's going to become.

That's a great quote.

 

[zsas]

Richard Prince's appeal was heard today...

http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/news-opinion/the-market/2012-05-21/price-cariou-oral-arguments/


Could take up to a year for the verdict

 

[ambaker]

Hopefully the verdict will stand.

 

[blansky]

Weak verdict.

Should have been executed.

With a stolen bullet.

 

[zsas]

Richard Prince's appeal was heard today...

http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/news-opinion/the-market/2012-05-21/price-cariou-oral-arguments/


Could take up to a year for the verdict

Verdict today, per below article, "Artist Richard Prince won a significant victory on appeal in the landmark intellectual property case Cariou v. Prince today."

http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/news-opinion/news/2013-04-25/richard-prince-wins-major-victory-in-landmark-copyright-suit/

 

[marenmcgowan]

Verdict today, per below article, "Artist Richard Prince won a significant victory on appeal in the landmark intellectual property case Cariou v. Prince today."

http://www.artinamericamagazine.com...ins-major-victory-in-landmark-copyright-suit/

Unbelievable. I do not understand the "fair use" aspect they refer to in this article.
I also cannot believe that buyers are paying up to 10 million for those crappy pieces Prince is calling art.

 

[zsas]

I'm not surprised. Warhol, Lichtenstein, etc., were appropriating way back when. Though I am not surprised at the reversal, it doesn't mean I agree w it

 

[doughowk]

Web-site designers, for example, follow a 10% guideline for their appropriations. With photo montage capabilities of digital workflow along with appropriations rulings, why would anyone bother to actually take a picture (other than as mementos)?

 

[removed account4]

people have been appropriating people's ideas and images and everything else
and not compensating the owner for a long long time ... didn't edison do it with the light bulb
and even though daguerre was "partners" with niépce he got all the credit and glory and $$$ for inventing
photography when someone else did all the work ...
steal the work from the web and use it on your website &c ... nothing new there.