Re: <nettime> 'Charging Bull' vs 'Fearless Girl'

[Flick Harrison <flick.harrison@gmail.com>]

Wow!  That’s hilarious.  But this copyright statute:  

> On Apr 13, 2017, at 02:32 , Felix Stalder <felix@openflows.com <mailto:felix@openflows.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> Siegel pointed to a 1990 copyright statute that grants visual artists
> the right “to prevent any intentional distortion, mutilation or other
> modification of that work which would be prejudicial to [the artist’s]
> reputation”.

Seems like such a broad statute could apply to the performance artist standing in front of Dana Shutz’s painting in the Whitney.  Sounds like a fun angle from which to continue drawing out that drama.

-- 
* WHERE'S MY ARTICLE, WORLD? http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Flick_Harrison <http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Flick_Harrison> 

* FLICK's WEBSITE: 
http://www.flickharrison.com <http://www.flickharrison.com/>
 <http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ZeroForConduct/~6/2>
↑ Grab this Headline Animator <http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/headlineanimator/install?id=90rffbei3nr88m9ci3u0qr9d14&w=2>

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: