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: Fwd: Re: [T7U9S2W] Unauthorized Use


> I think that Curt has done the right thing - Getty Images should be
> ashamed of themselves...

...maybe we all need to read or re-read our lawrence lessig on
the evolution of cyberlaw & regulation:

"The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World" (2001)
and:
"Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace" (2000)

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/103-5065083-0811011

"[...] Lessig holds that those who shriek the loudest at the thought of
interference in cyberdoings, especially at the hands of the government,
are blind to the ever-increasing regulation of the Net (admittedly, without
badges or guns) by businesses that find little opposition to their
schemes from consumers, competitors, or cops. The Internet will be
regulated, he says, and our window of opportunity to influence the design
of those regulations narrows each day.[...]

DISCUSSION

Re: RE: FW: Unauthorized Use


Here are some up to date definitions re: internet copyright, limits to
copyright, and fair use:

http://www.fplc.edu/tfield/copynet.htm
"Basic limits to copyright.
Although email messages and web pages may enjoy copyright protection,
rights are subject to several fundamental limits. For example, only
expression is protected, not facts or ideas. Also, later works that merely
happen to be very similar (or even identical) to earlier works do not
infringe if they were, in fact, independently created. Sources of general
information on those topics are listed below. [...]"

and here:
ONLINE FAIR USE OF COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL: ISSUES AND CONCERNS by Gerard
Martin
http://www.eff.org/IP/fair_use_online.article

and here:
http://arl.cni.org/scomm/copyright/uses.html
"The fair use provision of the Copyright Act allows reproduction and other
uses of copyrighted works under certain conditions for purposes such as
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching(including multiple copies for
classroom use), scholarship or research. Additional provisions of the law
allow uses specifically permitted by Congress to further educational and
library activities. The preservation and continuation of these balanced
rights in an electronic environment as well as in traditional formats are
essential to the free flow of information and to the development of an
information infrastructure that serves the public interest.

It follows that the benefits of the new technologies should flow to the
public as well as to copyright proprietors. As more information becomes
available only in electronic formats, the public's legitimate right to use
copyrighted material must be protected. In order for copyright to truly
serve its purpose of "promoting progress," the public's right of fair use
must continue in the electronic era, and these lawful uses of copyrighted
works must be allowed without individual transaction fees."

and here's a definitive quote from the above doc:

FAIR USE IN THE ELECTRONIC AGE:
SERVING THE PUBLIC INTEREST

The primary objective of copyright is not to reward the labor of authors,
but "[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." To this end,
copyright assures authors the right to their original expression, but
encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and information conveyed
by a work. This result is neither unfair nor unfortunate. It is the means
by which copyright advances the progress of science and art.

-- Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural
Telephone Service Co., 499 US 340, 349(1991)

yay.

JG

On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Curt Cloninger wrote:

> Mary,
>
> No goods or services are being promoted.
> http://www.playdamage.org/quilt/ is a non-profit collaborative art
> project. Here are its details:
> http://www.playdamage.org/quilt/invite.html
>
> sincerely,
> curt
>
>
>
> >I understand that you are not hosting the image but any display of
> >the image without a proper license is illegal. From our terms and
> >conditions - Any use of the image without such a license from Getty
> >Images is unauthorized. A license is needed in order to receive
> >permission to reproduce or manipulate this image. I know that you
> >can only assume that the image was licensed but I am telling you
> >that it is not, therefore all displays, including yours, is
> >unauthorized. We have the right to contact the isp host to ask for
> >cooperation when they have even less involvement in the content -
> >Under Section 512(c) of the Copyright Act, known as the Digital
> >Millennium Copyright Act, upon notice of infringement, in order to
> >take advantage of limitation of liability, qualified Internet
> >Service Providers must expeditiously remove the infringing material.
> >From the photographers perspective, who has asked us to represent
> >and protect his work, his image is featured on your site and is
> >being used to promote a good or service. This type use requires a
> >license and a fee or is considered copyright infringement.
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Curt Cloninger [<mailto:curt@lab404.com>mailto:curt@lab404.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 4:48 PM
> >To: Mary Walsh
> >Cc: ask@eff.org; list@rhizome.org
> >Subject: Re: FW: Unauthorized Use
> >
> >
> >Mary,
> >
> >I'm not hosting the image on my site. I am merely calling it into my
> >page from another site. I can only assume that the person who
> >submitted the image did have the rights to use it. Is it encumbent
> >upon me to provide licences for images to which I merely link?
> >
> >Respectfully,
> >Curt Cloninger
> ><http://www.lab404.com>http://www.lab404.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >I don't know who was responsible for this link and image use but I
> > >am kindly asking you to cooperate in removing the link as it appears
> > >on your site with the image in question.
> > >
> > >Best Regards, Mary
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Dermot Brannick
> >[<<mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com>mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com><mailto:dbran
> >nic1@yahoo.com>mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com]
> > >Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:52 PM
> > >To: Mary Walsh
> > >Subject: Re: Unauthorized Use
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear mary,
> > >i don not own nor know who does the site which holds a
> > >link to ours, this is the first time i have seen this
> > >site which you sent me. We run permkids.org and have
> > >no knowledge of the site which contains the link. I
> > >suggest you contact them directly.
> > >Yours
> > >Perm director
> > >Brannick
> > >
> > >__________________________________________________
> > >Do You Yahoo!?
> > >Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> > >from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> > ><<http://uk.my.yahoo.com>http://uk.my.yahoo.com><http://uk.my.yahoo
> >.com>http://uk.my.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > >=======================================================
> > >This email and its contents are confidential. If you
> > >are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose
> > >or use the information within this email or its
> > >attachments. If you have received this email in error,
> > >please delete it immediately. Thank you.
> > >=======================================================
> >
> >
> >=======================================================
> >This email and its contents are confidential. If you
> >are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose
> >or use the information within this email or its
> >attachments. If you have received this email in error,
> >please delete it immediately. Thank you.
> >=======================================================
>
> + i am not my favorite person
> -> Rhizome.org
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php3
>

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: FW: Unauthorized Use


Curt, et al.,

This seems absurd. Any 21st century internet/copyright lawyer worth three
cents would tell you that to link is not to "use" in the usual sense. The
fact that no profit or solicitation or false claim of authorship is being
made from linking to this image should make it a clear "Fair Use" case. Fair
Use covers non-profit public services including education and the arts
(slide lectures, for instance, or appropriation artworks a la Hans
Haacke. You are not selling coffee mugs for chrissakes) -- however, you
aren't even really "using" the image -- someone else has appropriated it
and you are linking to it. The real issue is whether their appropriation
is Fair Use. If it's appropriated as art and not to make a buck then it
very well may be just fine. But then again: remember the case of Jeff
Koons and those puppies? And what about more recently, the case against
Damien Hirst? But both of those artists were making a FORTUNE off their
appropriations. That's a red flag: it means the people sueing them saw a
good way to make a fast buck. I think they both settled out of court. I
would think the Getty has better things to do.

It's truly embarrassing that the Getty I-bank of all things is hassling
impoverished net artists over rather typical links usage --how incredibly
ignorant-- when they should be protecting their stock photographers from
copyright fraud (royalties, royalties). Someone did not do their
homework. Or someone's supervisor did not do their homework, more likely.

Curt, try calling Volunteer Lawyers For the Arts and see if you can get
them to send you a clear citation of the United States Copyright "Fair
Use" clause. I wonder if it's been updated in terms of cyberlaw (it's an
old, tried and true clause). I'll bet anyway you fall squarely under it:
http://www.vlany.org/ (212) 319-ARTS ext.1

best regards, good luck. don't let yourself be bullied.
JG

On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Curt Cloninger wrote:

> Mary,
>
> I'm not hosting the image on my site. I am merely calling it into my
> page from another site. I can only assume that the person who
> submitted the image did have the rights to use it. Is it encumbent
> upon me to provide licences for images to which I merely link?
>
> Respectfully,
> Curt Cloninger
> http://www.lab404.com
>
>
>
>
> >I don't know who was responsible for this link and image use but I
> >am kindly asking you to cooperate in removing the link as it appears
> >on your site with the image in question.
> >
> >Best Regards, Mary
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Dermot Brannick [<mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com>mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:52 PM
> >To: Mary Walsh
> >Subject: Re: Unauthorized Use
> >
> >
> > Dear mary,
> >i don not own nor know who does the site which holds a
> >link to ours, this is the first time i have seen this
> >site which you sent me. We run permkids.org and have
> >no knowledge of the site which contains the link. I
> >suggest you contact them directly.
> >Yours
> >Perm director
> >Brannick
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> >from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> ><http://uk.my.yahoo.com>http://uk.my.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >=======================================================
> >This email and its contents are confidential. If you
> >are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose
> >or use the information within this email or its
> >attachments. If you have received this email in error,
> >please delete it immediately. Thank you.
> >=======================================================
>
> + i am not my favorite person
> -> Rhizome.org
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php3
>

DISCUSSION

Flavorpill: Night Vision Panel...


[from Flavorpill 7/16/02]

ART
Night Vision Panel Discussion

when: Wed 7.17 (7pm)
where: White Columns (320 W 13th St, 212.924.4212)
price: FREE
links: http://www.whitecolumns.org

What images are conjured when you think "night vision" --- marines in
craggy outlooks, playing Battle Zone at your childhood arcade, infrared
surveillance cameras catching a theft-in-progress? All of these inter-
pretations and more are explored in White Column's current exhibition,
which presents artists influenced by technologies employed by the
military, intelligence agencies, and NASA. A panel discussion with some of
the artists, Time Out New York Art Editor Tim Griffin, and curator Joy
Garnett examines other related issues. Expect heated debates about war,
voyeurism, the media, and the appropriation of technology for
destructive, as well as creative, purposes. (SR)

Note: The exhibition closes on 7.20.

"Flavorpill," week of July 15-19, 2002
http://www.flavorpill.net/current.shtml#nightvision
http://www.firstpulseprojects.net/NightVisionIndex.html
http://www.firstpulseprojects.net/nv_flavorpill.html

DISCUSSION

The Bomb Project | Nuke News Feed: July 1-16, 2002


http://thebombproject.org

JULY 2002 NEWS FEED
http://www.firstpulseprojects.net/bombproject/News_6-02.html

CONTENTS: Links to:

July Issue of The Sunflower (Waging Peace/Nuclear Peace Foundation)
July/August, 2002
Nuclear Safety: Uh-oh in Ohio (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)
July 16, 2002
Industry Tackles Packaging of Nuclear Waste For Yucca (NYTimes)
July 16, 2002
President to Detail Security Strategy (Washington Post)
July 16, 2002
Two Men Held in Alleged Extortion of Arizona Nuclear Plant (AP)
July 15, 2002
Brookings Report Urges Congress to Revise Pres. Bush's Homeland Security
Proposal (Brookings Inst.)
July 15, 2002
Residents Doubt Anti-Nuke Pills Potassium Iodide Will Be Given... (York
Daily Record)
July 15, 2002
Final Heat in Race For Fusion Reactor (Toronto Star)
July 14, 2002
Boy, 3, in protest at nuclear cargo (The Age)
July 11, 2002
Speeding Nuclear Cleanup is Seen as a Way to Reduce Work (NYTimes)
July 11, 2002
US gives green light to nuclear dump in Nevada (The Guardian)
July 11, 2002
Lawmakers Question Nuke Cleanup Plane (AP)
July 10, 2002
Many a Molehill Before Nuke Waste Finds Mountain (NYTimes)
July 9, 2002
A Critical Vote on Nuclear Waste (NYTimes Op-Ed)
July 9, 2002
Senate Gives Final Approval to Nevada Nuclear Waste Site (NYTimes)
July 5, 2002
Japan Defends Nuclear Fuel Decision (Hoover's Online)

:::::::::::::::::::::::::
http://thebombproject.org