The Mekas example, for me anyway, is an opportunity to insist on an ethics of the image that isn't conceivable in terms of law. If it were footage of Michael Jackson, the significance can be exhausted by way of law and control. When it is a diary work and the life is that of Jonas Mekas, how can this even be addressed on the same terms?
Now I must go. Otherwise, it never ends. Bernie On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 6:02 PM Bernard Roddy <[email protected]> wrote: > By the way, the whole topic became more interesting as we took up the > collection of information and the ownership of data. Instead of a film, a > large collection of information acquires the status of property. Here > appropriation takes on characteristics of data mining. When is there enough > going on to accept the price paid by an individual who might object or feel > violated? The artistic advantages of merging the two issues (privacy and > copyright) is that the question becomes at least as much about the > originality of ideas as one of one's control over visual or auditory > elements. > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 5:28 PM Bernard Roddy <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Artforum (October, 2013) has an article by Ross Lipman on the restoration >> of Bruce Conner's film, Crossroads (1976). It's nice reading for aesthetic >> reasons, because it's all about decisions regarding digital transfers that >> get complicated by the artist's own reworking of the film, as well as those >> considerations having to do with how the experience of it today ought to >> resemble the experience of it when it was, in a sense, completed. Lipman >> would be good for those discussions having to do with the archival >> integrity of what we are getting. But when he says things like "the most >> fundamental sea change wrought by the so-called digital revolution is the >> loss of the singular work," he isn't opening the door to the equivalent of >> plagiarism. >> >> I am becoming interested in the online teaching environment and recently >> learned that full-time faculty retain exclusive control over the content >> they develop in Computing and Digital Media, but adjunct faculty give up >> their rights (other than to use what they make) to the university. It's not >> exactly the problem facing artists who can so easily be subjected to >> duplication and upload without their consent. But there is a resemblance in >> that copyright law, as it exist and is enforced (and as it is revised) is >> almost beside the point. In previous teaching that included copyright >> questions I began to see copyright law as essentially a tool for commercial >> purposes. What we would want to protest as a form of theft (and without >> appealing to markets or who earns what from it) isn't really of concern in >> copyright law. >> >> Bernie >> >> Bernie >> >
_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list [email protected] https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
