March 2006, 3 posts, 87 lines
Bill Ratner of Lawyers for the Creative Arts can likely help you, but the time involved and effort will sap your good will and drain you. Even though it's awkward, do the dance. It's your creative idea and this way you direct it. Sounds like a wondeful event.
Layne
On Feb 28, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Meg Duguid wrote:
> Hi all,
> I know this is not as fun as all of the critics > questions raised, but I need some legal help.
> A few years back I threw a silent dance party at the > MCA (twice) and at the Chicago Cultural Center (once). > It consisted of a DJ that spun a transmission to > wireless headsets that the audience could put on and > dance to. Something like 12,000 people came to all > three.
> Anyway the Chicago Loop Association is presenting a 24 > hour art party called Looptopia featuring a similar > silent dance party (this one is without me).
> Anyway I'm pretty sure that this party is based on > mine, so I have been in contact with them to let them > know who I am and my concerns. I thought that perhaps > if I played nice and went the route of "I'm sure you > saw the piece at the MCA and didn't realize that there > was an artist behind it," followed by "Now that you > know I'm here, just bring me on board and it will all > be OK."
> They were immediately responsive, but since have > remained fairly silent and are now asking me to > propose to do this work. I feel like that is much > like putting out a press release saying you are > showing a Picasso painting and then asking Picasso to > propose to paint it.
> Anyway I have been simultaneously looking for a lawyer > and am on a list for a pro bono lawyer, It's just that > I may not be able to get one until after the event in > May or the end of next week when they want proposals. > I need someone ASAP. Does anyone have any > suggestions?
> Thanks
> Meg
I think this notion of owning a creative format/idea is slightly ridiculous. Is it about getting credit/power or about being responsible to the creative idea?
and from wikipedia: flaming lips: "In a further attempt to enhance the live experience for the audience and to more accurately reproduce the sound of The Soft Bulletin live, the Lips devised the concept of the "Headphone Concert." A low- powered FM transmitter was set up at shows, and the concert was simultaneously broadcast to small Walkman-style receivers and headphones available for free to audience members. This would, in theory, allow the audiences greater sonic clarity while still feeling the power of a full live P.A.. This concept was debuted in Dallas, Texas and at the South by Southwest conference in Austin, Texas in March of 1999, and was subsequently used on the International Music Against Brain Degeneration Revue tour."
I think ideas are more interesting when the conversation is about ideas and not who owns them.
best regards, Conrad Bakker
On Feb 28, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Meg Duguid wrote:
> Hi all,
> I know this is not as fun as all of the critics > questions raised, but I need some legal help.
> A few years back I threw a silent dance party at the > MCA (twice) and at the Chicago Cultural Center (once). > It consisted of a DJ that spun a transmission to > wireless headsets that the audience could put on and > dance to. Something like 12,000 people came to all > three.
> Anyway the Chicago Loop Association is presenting a 24 > hour art party called Looptopia featuring a similar > silent dance party (this one is without me).
> Anyway I'm pretty sure that this party is based on > mine, so I have been in contact with them to let them > know who I am and my concerns. I thought that perhaps > if I played nice and went the route of "I'm sure you > saw the piece at the MCA and didn't realize that there > was an artist behind it," followed by "Now that you > know I'm here, just bring me on board and it will all > be OK."
> They were immediately responsive, but since have > remained fairly silent and are now asking me to > propose to do this work. I feel like that is much > like putting out a press release saying you are > showing a Picasso painting and then asking Picasso to > propose to paint it.
> Anyway I have been simultaneously looking for a lawyer > and am on a list for a pro bono lawyer, It's just that > I may not be able to get one until after the event in > May or the end of next week when they want proposals. > I need someone ASAP. Does anyone have any > suggestions?
> Thanks
> Meg
In actuality its about maintaining stewardship of any idea after it has been stated as unique and it is in your power to do so. While creative common thoughts are marvelous, no one actually asked if she would be on board to perform this piece knowing that it had been previously documented. Instead it looks that they wanted to announce their own terms, using their own team and undermining her previous work in whatever manner suited them. Even Cory "freaking " Doctrow gets say in how his shit gets used publicly. Your ad hoc critique of the piece is specific in its use of hardware, it doesn't engage the different venues nor does it engage the content, or its situational relationship to the DJ's performing let alone the piece's development as an aesthetic dialogue with a given architectural space. References to the Flaming Lips Program falters in comparison as it undermines the "Lips" performance and their immediate association to their audience and in "99" the old school cred related to the use of a specific sort of technology implemented by a particular set of audiophile that had "cred". The "Lips" neither delivered on the architectural front as they played wherever nor did they deliver to an open audience as their fan base was present and had to "pay" as to a larger aesthetic dialogue beyond their use of head phones one might argue, gimmick. Your citation also fails to mention how you experienced this piece by Ms. Duguid. As a personal experience in one of it's 3 venues locally or simply a text asking for help and how as an experience you perceived it. I'm assuming you also attended the "Lips" program so what was your take? Did you like wearing head phones at one and not the other? Were you annoyed at being asked to be involved with Duguids work as opposed to having payed for it at the "Lips"? Did you ask about the presence and the placement of the DJ's? I do however give "props" for using Wikipediea as your sole point of reference. Beyond all of this you're an artist and a teacher and what did you just say to another artist, "get bent" This was about Ms. Duguid's history performing the work in question and her right to continue doing so in an unobstructed fashion in the future. If her work is co opted by a corporate body with out her consent then what will that say for yours when just anybody can come along and call a painted object, oh lets say a Jasper Johns and get away with it. let us please answer reasonable questions without these flashes please. MT/DB
From: Conrad Bakker I think this notion of owning a creative format/idea is slightly
ridiculous. Is it about getting credit/power or about being
responsible to the creative idea?
and from wikipedia: flaming lips:
"In a further attempt to enhance the live experience for the audience
and to more accurately reproduce the sound of The Soft Bulletin live,
the Lips devised the concept of the "Headphone Concert." A low-
powered FM transmitter was set up at shows, and the concert was
simultaneously broadcast to small Walkman-style receivers and
headphones available for free to audience members. This would, in
theory, allow the audiences greater sonic clarity while still feeling
the power of a full live P.A.. This concept was debuted in Dallas,
Texas and at the South by Southwest conference in Austin, Texas in
March of 1999, and was subsequently used on the International Music
Against Brain Degeneration Revue tour."
I think ideas are more interesting when the conversation is about
ideas and not who owns them.
best regards,
Conrad Bakker
On Feb 28, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Meg Duguid wrote:
> Hi all,
> I know this is not as fun as all of the critics
> questions raised, but I need some legal help.
> A few years back I threw a silent dance party at the
> MCA (twice) and at the Chicago Cultural Center (once).
> It consisted of a DJ that spun a transmission to
> wireless headsets that the audience could put on and
> dance to. Something like 12,000 people came to all
> three.
> Anyway the Chicago Loop Association is presenting a 24
> hour art party called Looptopia featuring a similar
> silent dance party (this one is without me).
> Anyway I'm pretty sure that this party is based on
> mine, so I have been in contact with them to let them
> know who I am and my concerns. I thought that perhaps
> if I played nice and went the route of "I'm sure you
> saw the piece at the MCA and didn't realize that there
> was an artist behind it," followed by "Now that you
> know I'm here, just bring me on board and it will all
> be OK."
> They were immediately responsive, but since have
> remained fairly silent and are now asking me to
> propose to do this work. I feel like that is much
> like putting out a press release saying you are
> showing a Picasso painting and then asking Picasso to
> propose to paint it.
> Anyway I have been simultaneously looking for a lawyer
> and am on a list for a pro bono lawyer, It's just that
> I may not be able to get one until after the event in
> May or the end of next week when they want proposals.
> I need someone ASAP. Does anyone have any
> suggestions?
> Thanks
> Meg
I am in total agreement in regards to stewardship of the idea. But
the other side to this topic is the inherent alignment with a
corporate model of idea ownership which is often dependent upon
singularity and often enforces what becomes a temporary fix of power.
What is the difference between giving your rights away when someone
or some institution steals your idea and giving your rights away by
aligning oneself with the corporate model of ownership as pretense to
power? So I think my initial question is still interesting: is this
about credit/status or is it about responsibility to the idea
(stewardship)? I see both strands at work in this situation but I'm
much more interested in generating energy around understanding the
history of ideas, the connection of ideas and making interesting
ideas out of less interesting ones than in generating false
authenticity around singularity.
Perhaps I responded to quickly in my initial post, but I do think all
of these sound/performance events are fascinating and are worth
discussion in the way you framed them: what are the differences and
how are they different? Are these differences a result of technology
or something more fundamental?
Your last question is interesting, but I think it's also an important
one. Artists produce and control the space around their objects/
work, but I do not see that control as being something exclusive or
unilateral. It is a constant negotiation which has more to do with
assertion, complicity and change. Artists comply to these cultural
conditions or they construct small kingdoms of power and control--
picture Donald Judd as the Wizard of Oz.
best regards,
Conrad Bakker
On Mar 2, 2007, at 3:45 AM, Dogmatic gallery wrote:
> In actuality its about maintaining stewardship of any idea after it
> has been
> stated as unique and it is in your power to do so. While creative
> common
> thoughts are marvelous, no one actually asked if she would be on
> board to
> perform this piece knowing that it had been previously documented.
> Instead
> it looks that they wanted to announce their own terms, using their
> own team
> and undermining her previous work in whatever manner suited them.
> Even Cory
> "freaking " Doctrow gets say in how his shit gets used publicly.
> Your ad hoc critique of the piece is specific in its use of
> hardware, it
> doesn't engage the different venues nor does it engage the content,
> or its
> situational relationship to the DJ's performing let alone the piece's
> development as an aesthetic dialogue with a given architectural space.
> References to the Flaming Lips Program falters in comparison as it
> undermines the "Lips" performance and their immediate association
> to their
> audience and in "99" the old school cred related to the use of a
> specific
> sort of technology implemented by a particular set of audiophile
> that had
> "cred". The "Lips" neither delivered on the architectural front as
> they
> played wherever nor did they deliver to an open audience as their
> fan base
> was present and had to "pay" as to a larger aesthetic dialogue
> beyond their
> use of head phones one might argue, gimmick.
> Your citation also fails to mention how you experienced this piece
> by Ms.
> Duguid. As a personal experience in one of it's 3 venues locally or
> simply a
> text asking for help and how as an experience you perceived it. I'm
> assuming
> you also attended the "Lips" program so what was your take? Did you
> like
> wearing head phones at one and not the other? Were you annoyed at
> being
> asked to be involved with Duguids work as opposed to having payed
> for it at
> the "Lips"? Did you ask about the presence and the placement of the
> DJ's? I
> do however give "props" for using Wikipediea as your sole point of
> reference.
> Beyond all of this you're an artist and a teacher and what did you
> just say
> to another artist, "get bent" This was about Ms. Duguid's history
> performing
> the work in question and her right to continue doing so in an
> unobstructed
> fashion in the future. If her work is co opted by a corporate body
> with out
> her consent then what will that say for yours when just anybody can
> come
> along and call a painted object, oh lets say a Jasper Johns and get
> away
> with it.
> let us please answer reasonable questions without these flashes
> please.
> MT/DB
Another post vaporized. Are you sure this is an unmoderated discussion listserv?
Anyway, I don't think you'll be able to use this stewardship argument for an idea that is rather general. I mentioned having seen a silent concert dance party on a British TV series called Peep Show, and I don't think those BBC writers consulted any artist about it. A medium is a medium. No content was ripped off.
Besides, there's so much that could be done in art that, in my view anyway, it's better to move on to another project rather than get bogged down in a legal skirmish that is mostly going to benefit those people employed at maintaining legal skirmishes.
-- Ken
P.S. -- I'm hitting enter now ... to watch these words disappear forever.
Marie and I wandered through the Museum of Contemporary Art last Friday.
Enjoyed some exhibits. Took some notes.
Tony Fitzpatrick had a cool 26 drawing exhibit, "Max and Gaby's Alphabet, 2000." I liked Chris Kenny's cover art for the custom books exhibit, too; his was called "Eating and Being Eaten." The drone guitar video exhibit wasn't anything spectacular -- seen too much of that before, done better and done semi-commercially (like Throbbing Gristle's 20 Jazz Greats).
-- Ken
[http://www.baghdadmuseum.org/posters/c72488.html]
[http://www.englandgallery.com/]
[http://www.museumofbadart.org/]
There does seem to be a problem with posts disappearing...
I do disagree with Meg and Diego. While commenting on arguments not addressing content, Diego seems to miss the point that this was never part of Meg's original argument/explanation.
In my understanding, it was the format that has been replicated. Was this a format pioneered by Meg? Clearly not. Was this a use of tools and application entirely original? No, it wasn't. I read the explanation as being based on the similarity of the two things; a broadcast in one form or another and not based on the content therein. Also, there is no mention of any of Meg's performances being site specific. To go perhaps too far, did the first person to come up with audio tours in museums then hold sway over the entire developement and market of such things? Did Meg consider having every participant sign a binding non-infringement policy?
This new performance by another party doesn't appear to hinder Meg in pursuing this type of art in any way. If she does it better than that will become apparent. To assert ownership of a idea like this is obscene. Especially for an artist, considering that we all are largely composites of the artists we have studied and emulated.
Also, whether an audience paid for entry to the event is irrelevant.
This is somewhat similar to my earlier post concerning Susan Meiselas and the appropriation of her image. The main difference being that Susan can say unequivocally that she creatd that exact image. With something of this performance nature it is much murkier since it isn't a singular object.
If Meg wanted to make a big deal about this, the angle
of attack should be like trademark infringment.
People have seen Meg s MCA and Cultural Center
projects,and identify them with her. They may not be
unique, but at least unusual - not just another DJ set
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 amikos at looseknitcollective.com wrote:
> There does seem to be a problem with posts disappearing...
Hey, Mikos; I checked the maillog for today. There was one from you which
went directly to /dev/nul. I wonder what you had sent? I would have been
equal to first class spam.
/jno
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 gageken at aim.com wrote:
> Another post vaporized. Are you sure this is an unmoderated discussion
> listserv?
Yes. But the email cleanup script has been removed. Now emails just grow
and grow until they run into the 16 K limit, then they vaporize. This
gageken email, with the headers (whcih run 3 screen loads) was 17K.
If you wish (let me know, you all) I could consider a gizmo whcih will
truncate instead. The original reason (besides 'cleanth') was to protect
rewrite buffers from overruns, which is always a security risk.
And dont feel bad, I just sent an email to this listserv and it never
arrived, cause I had changed my email address, and error messages like
"you must subscribe first" get dumped into a deamon folder. I just found
out by searching through my off-site email folders.
/jno
jno - thank you for keeping this thing up, but I don't
think any of us understand any of this.
--- jno > On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 gageken at aim.com wrote:
> > Another post vaporized. Are you sure this is an
> unmoderated discussion
> > listserv?
> Yes. But the email cleanup script has been removed.
> Now emails just gro w
> and grow until they run into the 16 K limit, then
> they vaporize. This
> gageken email, with the headers (whcih run 3 screen
> loads) was 17K.
> If you wish (let me know, you all) I could consider
> a gizmo whcih will
> truncate instead. The origi nal reason (besides
> 'cleanth') was to protect
> rewrite buffers from overruns, which is always a
> security risk.
> And dont feel bad, I just sent an email to this
> listserv and it never
> arrived, cause I had changed my email address, and
> error m essages like
> "you must subscribe first" get dumped into a deamon
> folder. I just found
> out by searching through my off-site email folders.
> /jno
I don't completely understand the lingo but it sounds very cool.
should we just split up longer posts into a couple of shorter posts?
thanks all knowing jno, I hope everthing gets cleared up.
Justin
On 3/2/07, michael bulka > --- jno > > On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 gageken at aim.com wrote:
> > > Another post vaporized. Are you sure this is an
> > unmoderated discussion
> > > listserv?
> > Yes. But the email cleanup script has been removed.
> > Now emails just gro w
> > and grow until they run into the 16 K limit, then
> > they vaporize. This
> > gageken email, with the headers (whcih run 3 screen
> > loads) was 17K.
> > If you wish (let me know, you all) I could consider
> > a gizmo whcih will
> > truncate instead. The origi nal reason (besides
> > 'cleanth') was to protect
> > rewrite buffers from overruns, which is always a
> > security risk.
Ken,
Was that a drive-by review of the work up at the MCA? nicely done,
simple and to the point. Makes me wanna go see the show.
thanks,
Justin
On 3/2/07, gageken at aim.com > Marie and I wandered through the Museum of Contemporary Art last Friday.
> Enjoyed some exhibits. Took some notes.
> Tony Fitzpatrick had a cool 26 drawing exhibit, "Max and Gaby's Alphabet, 2000." I liked Chris Kenny's cover art for the custom books exhibit, too; his was called "Eating and Being Eaten." The drone guitar video exhibit wasn't anything spectacular -- seen too much of that before, done better and done semi-commercially (like Throbbing Gristle's 20 Jazz Greats).
> -- Ken
> [http://www.baghdadmuseum.org/posters/c72488.html]
> [http://www.englandgallery.com/]
> [http://www.museumofbadart.org/]
Hi Justin,
I guess your characterization of it is dead on, a drive-by review. Blink and ya' missed it.
I did like some of the other exhibits at the MCA, even the ones that looked like a showroom from Menards or Home Depot. The big white room with neon orange carpeting was, in my opinion, cool; it had the effect of making the white on the ceiling appear as a hue of blue (color-inverted orange). Marie felt like she was at the International Builder's Show.
I actually wanted to see the wallpaper exhibit called "Jellyfish Eyes" (in the restaurant). I'd read about it at the MCA website. I liked it as a vibrant anim -inspired piece of pop-art. I even liked it as wallpaper. But it didn't really send me as innovative or awe-inspiring, so I ignored mention of it (till now).
Catch you about,
Ken
Ken,
Was that a drive-by review of the work up at the MCA? nicely done,
simple and to the point. Makes me wanna go see the show.
thanks,
Justin
Hello,
A friend who runs a space texted the following to
me earlier
Did you see the new reader format? I think we
should protest
I m curious how others feel-
Yours,
Philip
is this because of some new graphic elements or what? ---protest new immigration policies and the patriot act new initiatives not stupid new layouts by a local newspaper...there are more important things.
true...there are more important things...but here i go again biting off
more than i can chew: protest the patriot act AND write letters telling
the reader their new format sucks and, unless i'm missing a special
text-pullout somewhere in another section, that's one less reason to
pick up the weekly.
for simple things such as: "what's the address of the hyde park art
center again?" or "what's the number of the arts club so i can figure
out if they even have a show up or not?", the reader's useless.
to be fair, color looks nice, and all the other sections are still
working well, but this new slant with the gallery/museum section i just
don't see the point of.
except, of course, that my precious textual info is now online, but when
i'm stranded on the wrong streetcorner trying to remember if an opening
at duchess starts at 6 or 7, that doesn't help much.
dear free chicago weekly paper, please give me print information.
brian
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, (((polvo))) wrote:
> is this because of some new graphic elements or what? ---protest new
> immigration policies and the patriot act new initiatives not stupid
> new layouts by a local newspaper...there are more important things.
I personally am furious at the Tribune for relocating the weather page --
since I dont listen to radio or tv in the morning. Now I actually have to
step outside to gage the weather for the day.
Good thing I got in under _old_ immigration policies, Polvo [parenthesis
withheld]. /jno
cultural criticism, Trib 31 Jan:
Business section: Microsoft's 'Vista' mother approved
jno,
you used to criticize us mac users before but i have heard Vista sucks. Us mac-using-mofos (putting $$ in Steve Job's pockets) curse and look at porn all the time... so forget the mothas with curious daughters..
"I don't want my daughters to see dirty words."
Was it "AutoCorrect," "Macro," "Data Merge Manager" or "Templates and
Add-Ins" she objected to?
Or didn't the article say?
**************************************
AOL now
offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at
[http://www.aol.com.]
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007, (((polvo))) wrote:
> jno, you used to criticize us mac users before but i have heard Vista
> sucks. Us mac-using-mofos (putting $$ in Steve Job's pockets) curse
> and look at porn all the time... so forget the mothas with curious
> daughters..
Well, of course, Macs now use OS-X, which is a 1970's version of Unix
(Free-BSD), parts of which are incorporated into the 27 other Unix OS's,
but even more amazing is that the new boxes are built on x86 Intel
processors. I am so proud of Jobs joining the Church of Intel, and finding
redemption in Un*x.
And Elms: -- "AutoCorrect," "Macro," "Data Merge Manager" or "Templates
and Add-Ins"
I have no idea what she objected to (my last Win box blew up 4 or 5 years
ago) or what any of these are. But I could imagine. On a closer look at
these titles.. they are funny. "Hey babe, give me a Steve-Job, or let's
Macro, I don't wanna spend time AutoCorrecting."
OK, that mixed OS metaphors. So bad.
/jno
- and whether she was commissioned or curated or
whatever, the piece was considered an artwork. Seeing
a similar project at a similar public venue in the
the same city, viewers could be expected to assume it
was Meg s. Anything that the Loop-a-loosa crew did -
sloppy execution, sponsorhip tie-ins, something
offemsive to a sensitive group, or something so lame
as to be offensive to Meg s fans - could reflect
negatively on Meg, her reputaion, her career. etc etc
etc.
"Back off Biatch! or I'll vaporize your post to protect my rewrite
buffers from being overrun!"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"I told them, 'I want nothing labeled tools.'" said [Melissa] Regan
[a Microsoft beta tester and mother of three ], "I don't want my
daughters to see dirty words." [Microsoft complied, removing its tool.]