3 ms·
There’s an art dealer where I live who is extremely shady. He steals the work of other artists, copies and mimics their styles, and then mass produces their wo
by sammalloy 4y ago
There’s an art dealer where I live who is extremely shady. He steals the work of other artists, copies and mimics their styles, and then mass produces their work as his own so that he doesn’t have to pay them.
He also has an extensive practice that involves cybersquatting on domains and redirecting searches from these artists to his own work. He also trolls for photography online and steals the images from these artists and sells it under their name and pockets the money without paying them.
Eventually, a group of artists found out and ostracized him from the local community. He finally shut down his gallery last week, but I’ve been told this went on for 15 years. Artists need better protection under the law (and new laws to protect them if needed), and more enforcement mechanisms to uphold the law.
- JumpCrisscross 4y agoIt’s telling that until the penultimate sentence, I couldn’t tell if this anecdote would end with the name of a criminal or world-famous artist.
- password4321 4y agoOr "Stable Diffusion"
- largepeepee 4y agoThe trick to that question is whether that artist had a wealthy and influental patron. Poorly made art gets redefined as a "thought experiment" or "social commentary" all the time by a small closed circle of art snoobs. Think NFTs. Even forgeries turn into "real" art pieces if enough ppl in that circle can be convinced.
- pyrale 4y agoHonestly thought the art dealer was Google.
- busyant 4y agoi thought the "reveal" was going to be dall-e or google images or something along those lines.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y ago> Artists need better protection under the law (and new laws to protect them if needed), and more enforcement mechanisms to uphold the law. Please no. In the name of protecting artists, copyright law is strangling our culture. Misrepresenting art as being made by someone is already illegal as fraud. We do not need need “style” copyrights for arts. Mimicry and copying and modifying various styles from different artists is an integral part of the arts.
- bawolff 4y ago> Mimicry and copying and modifying various styles from different artists is an integral part of the arts. And depending on how mimicing, already covered by copyright law as a "derrivitave work".
- chii 4y agoyep. What's actually needed is easy to use, small-claims court style processes, no or low fees, and fast processing.
- gnopgnip 4y agoThe US has a small claims court for copyright infringement as of June 16 this year. https://ccb.gov/ https://ccb.gov/