Been following the updates on IG for the Levine show and the snippets looks special.
handpainting the exhibits, which some do not realise when they make statements about using marvel comics...

http://instagr.am/p/0V4LaLJv8f

It amazes me how she's has got away with sticking marvel artists own work onto her portraits without any copyright infringment !

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using proboards

The artists might. Marvel and DC might. But art continuously borrows and eats itself all the time. Even Sandra knows that. Hence her reaction and Facebook post regarding another artist copying her work.

Ha!

Oxel art is the new bnashsky*










*fake banksy

Opens the door to a whole new Disney art market! Hope it goes down the route of Pixar!ha

Sadly, Disney are right on it when it comes to breaches of copyright...

Unsure why Sandra Chevrier is highlighting the other plagiarising artist that was spotted? After all she has gotten away with what she's doing for a long time now and become rather wealthy in the process.

Not attacking SC btw - love her stuff and collect it

Its not the same as that, that is looking like official merch from warner brothers isnt it.

All artists steal stuff, its just part of the game. Im sure mcdonalds, disney, keith haring, rene gagnon, Vermeer and go knows who else are all equally pissed off with bnashky then...

Had this conversation before and the conclusion was 'deal with it'

seems like it's a bit of a grey area covered by the ever so vague term "fair use"

"Sampling and appropriation are popular techniques in which artists use preexisting work as a springboard for their own creativity. Modern recording software and photo editing programs have made it easy and inexpensive for artists to make exact copies of existing music and images. Free hosting, filesharing, and searching services for audio, pictures, and video on the Internet have made it nearly effortless to distribute your own work and to find others’ work for inspiration and adaptation. The law attempts to balance the advancement of the arts through sampling and appropriation with the right of artists to profit by licensing their work.

Most of the legal activity around sampling and appropriation focuses on copyright law. Whenever an artist takes a photograph, composes a new song, records a performance, or otherwise creates a new work, copyright law gives the artist exclusive rights to publish, distribute, and adapt that work. Copyright owners often sue when they think these rights have been infringed by someone else. The artist’s exclusive right to adaptation means that, typically, anyone else who wants to sample, appropriate, or otherwise use the work has to get permission. Permission, in the form of a license, sometimes requires a fee.

The law of copyright is complicated with respect to sampling and appropriation because a license is not always required. A number of artists have argued that their copying is a “fair use” of the original material, and in some cases they have succeeded. The applicability of the fair-use defense, which features prominently in a number of sampling and appropriation cases, is hard to predict in advance because it is a very fact-specific test based on four different factors. Different courts have varied in their approaches to these factors, and there is no clear instruction on how to weigh the factors against each other.

New copyright cases are decided every year, so if you’re borrowing someone else’s material for your art, be aware that the legal standards may be changing. Copying without either a license or a fair-use exception exposes you to a copyright infringement suit, which can be very costly."

This image reminds me of the Cenobites from Hellraiser

I agree. Though re: eine, I was pretty sure most if not all are custom fonts created by him.

Most ironic post of the day.

You got Banksys address? Big bag for him.


Rene gagnon

Cool. So you dont like it. Just say so.

So