No, you don’t. You still have copyright. Copyright is a legal right, exclusive to the originator or their assignee, to perform, publish, display, etc. a protected work. There are exclusions to copyright, fair use being one of them, and you can so transform an otherwise copyrighted work that it becomes your copyrighted…

What they get out of it is owning a Prince piece. I’m going to avoid all the ‘what is Art’ chat here, because I actually think what he’s doing is fairly interesting, ultimately, but for the buyers they have a work by a known name who is doing a very specific and culture focussed form of art, and will no doubt go up in…

I just... I don’t even have words for this. Except for maybe WTF?!

Yes. And here is the other thing for me: He is getting the money for these things. So whether it’s ironic, meant to call attention to the appropriation by social media, or whatever, the man is living the good life using other people’s work. By the way, speaking as a poet, I am not against using other people’s work as…

No, I wouldn’t say so. Blatantly reproducing contemporary works like Prince does is clearly plagiarism. You seem to be taking inspiration from something and re-creating it in a different aesthetic. That is your artistic vision. Appropriation isn’t always wrong, it depends on context. Prince is just a sexist a-hole who…

He has been sued multiple times. I’m not certain what cases he has lost or won, but most recently he won this 2013 case:

This is a popular misconception, but a misconception nonetheless. Straight from Instagram’s terms of use:

If I knew the answer to that- I would be rich as well. I once had a professor (who is also a famous art critic) tell our class in order to make it in the art world you needed to sleep with the right people. He said ‘always f@** up, never f@** down’. I can't say I've taken that advice.

I don’t know anything about art, but it sounds like you do. How did he get respected enough for shows and who is buying his ‘art’ for so much money? You have to have some clout to make the money. If I printed out a bunch of photos, no one would give me a show or pay me anything for them.

You don’t automatically lose your intellectual property rights by putting your art on social media. The disclosures might define what fair use the platform might make of your work, but that doesn’t give anyone in the world the right to just steal it and make money off of it.

I dunno.... I think the pic of that girl with the blue hair is way cool. Just bummed SHE doesn’t get cred for it.

The terms of service don't release art to the world, only to be used by the service.

Then be extra thankful you haven’t dedicated time to MAKING IT and work your ass off while this asshat rakes in the cash. Le Sigh.

Richard Prince is very very famous in the art world. Reappropriation has always been his thing. He is very aware that this is legal because he was involved in a lawsuit a few years back for something similar. It was actually worse than this in terms of “stealing”. Here is a link to it : http://www.artinamericamagazine.…

I did know someone who for their senior year art project went through the studios trash, found discarded projects and just crossed out the original artists names and put his in their place. He come up with some bullshit deep meaning explanation to the review board but later he told me he was just lazy and forgot that…

Prince actually has a pretty high value at auction. Trust me when I say that they didn’t buy these pieces because they were “moved by them.”

I do. That’s why I’m selling a printout of this thread for 400 Bitcoins.

They probably shilled out another hundred grand for an instagram of burning money.

NO. Do you not understand how art works or something?

Could you all put your Instagram links in the comments for me? I’m going to figure out a way to monetize on pictures of your lunch.