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.
Edwin Matzner:
December 6th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
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?