Tuesday, March 19, 2024
 

Richard Prince and Hurt Feelings


Today’s New York Times has an interesting story concerning Richard Prince’s retrospective at the Guggenheim and some of his cowboy

re-photographs. It seems that Jim Krantz, the original “commercial” photographer, has finally discovered his work hanging at the Guggenheim, but attributed to Prince and worth a few pennies more.

Krantz claims to not want money or to be considering a lawsuit. Although he believes that Prince is well within “fair use” grounds, he adds that he would like the public to know who the real–and original–photographer is.

Well, now everyone knows. But something tells us, in this age of litigation, affluent artists and cynicism, that Krantz (or a law firm), may possibly change his mind.

 

Comments: 1

Leave a reply »

 
  • Edwin Matzner

    The newspaper article contains many emotions, but few facts. What are the facts in this case? Who owns the copyright? Why mention fair use – does anybody claim fair use? Works of art are photographed often – can such copies be sold legally? What about the buyer’s feelings about title?

     
     
     
  • Leave a Reply
     
    Your gravatar
    Your Name
     
     
     

     
     
 
Legal

Clancco, Clancco: The Source for Art & Law, Clancco.com, and Art & Law are trademarks owned by Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento. The views expressed on this site are those of Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento and of the artists and writers who submit to Clancco.com. They are not the views of any other organization, legal or otherwise. All content contained on or made available through Clancco.com is not intended to and does not constitute legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed, nor is anything submitted to Clancco.com treated as confidential.

Website Terms of Use, Privacy, and Applicable Law.
 

Switch to our mobile site