mynameagain's discussions
Explore our other sites
  • kotaku
  • theroot
    mynameagain's discussions
    mynameagain
    mynameagain
    mynameagain
    PostsDiscussionsSaved ArticlesFollowers (0)Following (1)

    The objects that the artist would be displaying in this case are not stolen goods. The issue would be one of copyright / intellectual property rights. Since the images were already publicly available, the artist is not committing a crime by appropriating them, provided the art meets the criteria for "transformative…

    There's nothing wrong with having an opinion, but you (and many others here) are making declarative statements about how the artist / gallery owner / attendees should be prosecuted without any clear understanding of the law. Additionally, there is no evidence that this artist is also the hacker. The hacking and what…

    It is not a crime in many, many places to take upskirt photos. In places where it is illegal, it is, to my knowledge, an issue of invasion of privacy rather than a sex crime. Regardless, what you find it as has no bearing on the law. Since the display of the pieces is most likely not illegal, attendees would not be…

    The prints themselves would not be stolen goods.

    ..does your friend think that distributing pornography is illegal?

    Given that the images are already publicly available, the artist is not violating anyone's privacy (i.e., once information is made public, it is no longer private in the legal sense). They are not revealing or exposing anything that has not already been revealed or exposed. Your cop example is not analogous; a police…

    With what sex crime, exactly, should attendees be charged?

    : |

    He is not exposing anything that is not already exposed, nor committing any act of intrusion (unless it can be proven that he is the person who originally hacked their accounts). He is not the violator of any privacy - the images are already public. That is the part of the point of the body of work.

    Yeah - that was an interesting case. I think the line drawn was that the photographer was not necessarily intending to get shots of (the) monkeys in that specific situation - whereas had he set up the camera with a motion-sensor triggering mechanism, he would have done enough to claim copyright in any images he got as…

    I was addressing your blanket statement, which is extremely broad - and would thus (as written) include all types of Fair Use (including that in the case I cited). That statement is incorrect, as the case cited is an example of fair use of pirated materials. The same rule would likely apply here, as well; the artist…

    I think you'd be heard pressed to find a jurisdiction that makes it illegal for an artist to create a work of art depicting a famous person without first securing that person's permission and / or paying them a cut of the profits. Additionally, personality rights are limited by the First Amendment, which would most…

    You were equating the images in question to child pornography, and how making "Art" from them would effect the legality of displaying the images. The comparison is not analogous, as the very nature and content of child pornography itself is illegal from the get-go - the nature and content of these images is not (even…

    I highly doubt that is their actual defense - it is simply a public statement.

    A trial in which evidence is presented and considered by a jury in determining whether or not the defendant is guilty of the charges. That's the point of pleading not guilty even when you are guilty. Case in point; OJ Simpson.