joy garnett
Since the beginning
Works in United States of America

ARTBASE (1)
BIO
Joy Garnett is a painter based in New York. She appropriates news images from the Internet and re-invents them as paintings. Her subject is the apocalyptic-sublime landscape, as well as the digital image itself as cultural artifact in an increasingly technologized world. Her image research has resulted in online documentation projects, most notably The Bomb Project.

Notable past exhibitions include her recent solo shows at Winkleman Gallery, New York and at the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC; group exhibitions organized by the Whitney Museum of American Art, P.S.1/MoMA Contemporary Art Center, Artists Space, White Columns (New York), Kettle's Yard, Cambridge (UK), and De Witte Zaal, Ghent (Belgium). She shows with aeroplastics contemporary, Brussels, Belgium.

extended network >

homepage:
http://joygarnett.com

The Bomb Project
http://www.thebombproject.org

First Pulse Projects
http://firstpulseprojects.net

NEWSgrist - where spin is art
http://newsgrist.typepad.com/

Discussions (685) Opportunities (5) Events (8) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Re: FW: Michael Moore - Just in!]


Yah, I agree. In fact, I was revolted by the article for the reasons Ryan
states. Throw it on the "to burn" pile with the other creepy crappy
conspiracy rhetoric of the day.

cheers. or should I say "cheese."

jg

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, ryan griffis wrote:

> Is Farrakhan in the house?
> This article totally misses many points - mostly by taking the myth/rhetoric
> of the "free market" at face value. And the "blame the Jews" argument is not
> only anti-semitic, but lazy and melodramatic criticism. Can we play more into
> the whole intellectual-financier-mastermind stereotype? It would be more
> interesting if one looked at the use of Jewish migration to Israel by
> fundamentalist Christian groups getting ready for the rapture (has anyone
> seen Pat Robertson's 700 Club in the last year or so).
> There certainly are some valid, constructive criticisms of MM's film, but
> come on - a Jewish cover-up?
> non-new media related rant over.
>
> On Jul 9, 2004, at 11:31 AM, Andrej Tisma wrote:
>
>> FORWARDED ARTICLE
>> --------------
>>
>>
>> Michael Moore Shills For Illuminati Bankers Propaganda 911.
>> By Henry Makow, PhD
>> 7-5-4
>>
>> "Fahrenheit 911" blames the Bushes and Saudis for 911 and Iraq to divert
>> our
>> attention from the real masterminds.
>
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>

DISCUSSION

submit your story to PublicKnowledge.org::fair use it or lose it


re: Copyright + Fair Use

I came across this succinct post (below) on fair use today, via Furd Log,
http://msl1.mit.edu/furdlog/index.php?p"41
which sums things up two dominant opposing views from our side of
the war quite nicely Larry Lessig vs. Siva Vaidhyanathan.

I know a while back I mentioned I was headed to Philly to attend the
conference Knowledge Held Hostage at the Annenberg Center... and that I
had sortof promised to make a full report. Oops. Sorry about that, it's
been pretty busy around here. And now I'm suddenly doing the I'm Voting
Bush OUT protest blog launch, etc. etc. I did take copious notes and I
did buy Siva Vaidhyanathan's book Anarchist in the Library (for summer
reading), so if anyone has anything specific to ask me about the panels
fire away... transcripts, video of the proceedings, etc. are all here:
http://www.knowledgehostage.org/index.htm

At the opening session the audience was invited by moderator Gigi Sohn
of PublicKnowledge.org to come up to the mike and relate our own personal
copyright "horror stories" -- I did go up and relate the Molotov tale,
emphasizing the importance of the Rhizome-initiated Joywar, heh, which
met with a great positive response. And just moments before I opened my
mouth, someone smiled and caught my eye: lo-and-behold, Mr. Tribe was
in that audience.

Btw: Public Knowledge is a pretty cool org., and they are asking that
people submit their stories: "STRUGGLES WITH IP LAW, A Call for Stories in
Support of a Robust Public Domain" -- so check it out and submit your
horror story today! >
http://www.publicknowledge.org/take-action/action-struggles-with-ip

cheers,
Joy

///////////////////

Corante - Tech News. Filtered Daily.
Copyfight: the politics of IP
July 07, 2004
Fair Use It or Lose It

I was honored recently to attend a private book reading by Siva
Vaidhyanathan and Larry Lessig at Stanford. Both spoke at length about the
future of fair use, revealing a schism in perspective: Siva is generally
more hopeful, Larry characteristically pessimistic. Siva suggested that
society and the court system might eventually have more promising answers
to the current conflicts over copyright; Larry, meanwhile, argued that
"fair use is the right to hire a lawyer."

Today, Siva has a sad tale suggesting that most people have begun to agree
with Larry -- and worse, that society's gatekeepers of fair use --
librarians, educators, school administrators -- are letting it happen.

The story in a nutshell: a professor at a Northeastern college asked Siva
for permission to distribute a copy of a chapter of Anarchist in the
Library. "Of course," Siva replied, adding that he really ought not to
have asked. The professor responded by forwarding to Siva a note from the
college librarian, which warns firmly that "educational purpose is only
one of the four determining factors, and that the courts have weighted one
of them, the impact on the potential market, heavily in recent cases."
Siva, horrified, runs the use of the book chapter through the four-factor
test to show that the professor has a slam-dunk "case."

"Does that mean that some silly copyright holder might sue anyway?
Sure! [...]

This is the problem with fair use: It is a gamble. If you were
confident that the copyright holder would not care or would not bother for
fear of bad publicity, then you could go ahead and use the material as the
law intended you to do. But we have all been taught that copyright holders
are vultures out for a quick and easy meal. This is not always true.

But if we don't make a stand against vultures we might as well be
waiting around to become carrion.

[The] important thing to remember here is that if you follow your
librarian's advice and ask permission, you are making this entire fair use
calculus irrelevant. Why do we need section 107 at all if educators are
just going to cower upon the advice of copyright experts on campus?

It is our duty to push the envelope of fair use. And it is our duty to
demand that our institutions back us up when threatened by bullying
copyright holders who do not respect values of openness and freedom.

The problem with this, as Siva himself admits, is that hiring a lawyer
costs a great deal of money, and paying the possible infringement
penalties a lot more than that. It may be our "duty" to stand up to the
vultures, but few people, and few schools, can actually afford to do it.

I see four main avenues for attacking the problem:

* Fair use it or lose it. This is, I believe, Siva's main point, and
it's important: on a personal level, don't give in to the fear-mongering.
Don't be the person who asks Siva, Larry, or Cory Doctorow whether you can
make fair use of their books.
* Use and advocate the use of Creative Commons licenses, not only to
make work available but also to help people understand in a tangible way
that they are entitled to legitimate uses of creative works.
* Fortify the fair use gatekeepers. Provide as many resources as we
can for faculty members, librarians, systems administrators, school
officials, DMCA-takedown compliance officers, legal counsel, etc., to take
a stand against the bullies -- not only when push comes to shove and
someone files a lawsuit, but in the small, everyday ways that cumulatively
alter our perception of what constitutes fair use.
* Support and advocate supporting legislation that seeks to turn back
the tide by providing affirmative protection for traditionally legitimate
activities.

That's my take. I'd like to hear yours.
Posted by Donna at 9:48 PM | Permalink:
http://www.corante.com/copyfight/archives/004834.html

-
+

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Blog vs Board (re: Blogging Survey)


in that case, would it be possible/worthwhile to add a blogroll to
rhizome somehow? someone (superusers?) would have to choose what blogs to
subscribe to...

On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Francis Hwang wrote:

> Actually, I think it's much more promising to add individual blogs, for
> individual authors, than to have one more collectively moderated channel on
> Rhizome. The ecosystem of RSS users already has its own collective
> moderation, as drawn implicitly through the act of linking and tracked on
> search & indexing sites like Technorati, Blogdex, PubSub, Google, etc., etc.,
> etc. There are, of course, group blogs out in the world, but with a
> well-armed RSS reader you can mix your channel anyway.
>
> Individually authored blogs are easier to code/maintain, too.
>
> I also have to say that I don't think it's at all guaranteed that email will
> always be the killer app. These days I get more than 5000 emails a week, and
> the overwhelming majority are spam ... client-side filtering doesn't work at
> this volume, legal measures will just push spammers into legal gray zones,
> and, various sender verification systems are making their way through the
> standards process but will take years to codify and implement. In the
> meantime, the upcoming versions of operating systems from both Redmond and
> Cupertino will include RSS readers ... the future of email as a one-to-many
> broadcast medium is by no means guaranteed, unfortunately.
>
> F.
>
> On Jul 7, 2004, at 1:30 PM, Alexander Galloway wrote:
>
>> i find this blog thread very interesting. these are some of the issues
>> that we have wrestled with ever since the beginning of rhizome: the best
>> way to exchange content collaboratively.
>>
>> a quick summary of what rhiz has attempted thus far (Francis--correct me
>> if i'm wrong)... at the start of rhizome, mark tribe decided that the best
>> way to navigate the signal-to-noise problem was to have two lists, one
>> heavily moderated and one completely open. this resulted in the Digest/Raw
>> format that has persisted since. people wanting a filter subscribed to
>> Digest, while those who could handle the deluge subscribed to Raw. in the
>> olden days the website was edited by the same person who edited Digest,
>> and therefore ended up resembling the filtered email list rather then the
>> unfiltered. eventually a web archive of Raw was added to balance things
>> out a little. then, after a few years, rhizome switched over to a more
>> decentralized format, handing the editorial selection for the website to a
>> group of "superusers" who are able to pick which articles appear on the
>> front page.
>>
>> as others have already pointed out in this thread, RSS feeds have
>> fundamentally changed the landscape of the web. it's my opinion that
>> rhizome might be ready for another redesign, one that can accommodate the
>> aggregation and republishing functionality enabled by RSS. yes, email will
>> always be the killer app, so of course some balance between email content
>> and web feed content should be achieved.
>>
>> by way of contrast.. i've recently been hanging out over on the eyebeam
>> reblog system (http://eyebeam.org/reblog/) and am currently coding version
>> 2 of the backend (with much help from Jonah Peretti and Michael Frumin).
>> reblog is formally quite similar to the current rhizome website in the
>> sense that it has a community-fed text input system that is then parsed
>> and republished on the site. reblog is simple, it takes an unlimited
>> number of RSS feeds as input and lets you parse them into a single RSS
>> feed as output. the main differences with rhiz i can see are 1) rhizome
>> uses the emails posted to rhizome raw as its input channel, while reblog
>> uses posts from about 80 web feeds, 2) rhizome uses a group of
>> "superusers" who can publish articles on the website, while reblog uses a
>> single rotating "guest reblogger" (a convention which could easily be
>> changed in the future to include multiple simultaneous rebloggers).
>>
>> rhizome could conceivably reorganize itself around the reblog model, using
>> both email and rhizomer blog feeds as the input.
>>
>> +
>> -> post: list@rhizome.org
>> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
>> +
>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>>
>
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>

DISCUSSION

NEWSgrist: *Female Persuasion...* July 2004 pt.1


NEWSgrist: *Female Persuasion...* July 2004 pt.1
============================
============================
NEWSgrist
where spin is art
for resources + pics + links to full articles go to:
http://newsgrist.typepad.com/

free e-subscriptions {subscribe // unsubscribe}
http://www.newsgrist.net/subscribe.html
============================
Vol.5, no.12 (July 2004) part 1
============================
*Underbelly*

post your own news, press releases, urls:
http://pub11.bravenet.com/forum/show.php?usernum

DISCUSSION

Steve Kurtz Benefit July 9 - Update (fwd)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 16:23:04 +0100
From: Rob La Frenais <roblafrenais@clara.co.uk>
To: Undisclosed Recipients <info@artscatalyst.org>
Subject: Steve Kurtz Benefit July 9 - Update

Art is Still Not Terrorism, nor is it Mail Fraud or whatever other
ridiculous charge the US govt. has cooked up to save face.

Following the latest news on the indictment of Steve Kurtz from Critical Art
Ensemble (see www.caedefensefund.org), although the original bioterrorism
charges are now completely off the table, the trial still
promises to be financially and psychologically draining for the defendant.

Barry Schwabsky, Warren Neidich and Anjalika Sagar, with the Arts Catalyst
and ArtsAdmin invite you to join us in an unmissable gathering of artists,
academics and concerned individuals to help raise the legal costs of his
defence.

The benefit on July 9 19.00 at the Courtroom, Toynbee Studios, 28 Commercial
St, Aldgate, London, goes ahead, with speeches and messages from
celebrities, including defendant Steve Kurtz by video, DJ mixes by Kodwo
Eshun and music by si-cut.db among others, including surprise guests
(contact anjalisaga@blueyonder.co.uk before THIS Friday July 2 if you have a
short set to offer, zero-minimal tech backup!)

How much? Free, but bring your chequebook. We are suggesting a donation of
at least 24 pounds sterling.

The recent decision by the courts to throw away the charges of
Bioterrorism and replace them with mail fraud is a victory for all of us. It
shows that we can make a difference. Our benefit is as important to raise
money for the debts Steve has incurred and the court case he still needs to
defend.

Benefit Committee: Kathy Battista, Julien Dobbs-Higginson, Kodwo Eshun,
Charlie Gere, Jan Hietala, Janis Jefferies, Susan and Ben Keisler, Karen
Knorr, Kathy Kubicki, Warren Neidich, Sandra Percival, Anjalika Sagar, Marq
Smith, John Slyce, Barry Shwabsky, Mark Tribe, Paul Wombell, Karen Wright,
and Robert Zimmer.

We can accept cash or cheques only, no cards (payable to The Arts Catalyst),
either on the door or to The Arts Catalyst at the above address. If you are
unable to attend but would like to make a donation, please do so either
direct to the defence fund - www.caedefensefund.org - or by sending a cheque
to Arts Catalyst. The Arts Catalyst is a charitable arts organisation
(charity number: 1042433). Money donated will be transferred directly to the
CAE Defense fund.

Organisational help from:
www.artscatalyst.org
www.artsadmin.co.uk

light fare sponsored by Story Organic deli

rsvp to info@artscatalyst.org
if you are coming so we can calculate numbers. Don't forget your chequebook!