John T Unger says “DEFEND ART.”
What happened:
Artist John T Unger’s work has been copied by a manufacturer. That mass-producing imitator has now filed suit to have Unger’s copyrights of the work removed so that it can continue selling unlicensed and inexpensive knockoffs of the work. For more information about the case, visit this page of the artist’s site.
How people are reacting:
Predictably, much of the art community is in uproar. There’s a lot of talk about Unger’s case setting a precedent for artist copyright issues, and creatives are rallying behind the cause.
John T Unger’s Beach Burner Portable Bonfire is an example of the functional sculpture work that the manufacturer is imitating.
Part of me feels sorry for Unger. The way he tells it, the manufacturer sounds like a real scumbag and I wouldn’t want to have to deal with someone like that trying to mass-produce my work either. Unger points out that he didn’t initiate the lawsuit—the manufacturer did so after Unger sent a cease-and-desist letter—and that he’s simply trying to defend his work. He’s already $50,000 into this legal mess, and I imagine that if I’d committed so much money to a thing I’d want to see it through as well.
That said, most of me thinks that Unger is deeply mistaken.
Why did he copyright his work in the first place? Why did he buy into a system that’s been utterly corrupted by mega-corporations intent on owning culture? Copyright law as it stands today is not for artists, because, as the reinventors of culture, artists are forever stealing from each other and from everyone to make the world anew: that’s what we do. The law in the United States makes any amount of innovative recycling illegal (that is if a corporation owns the rights to the piece of culture that’s being reconceived). Why would any artist want to be a part of a legal arrangement that punishes the core element of what she-he does?
Why did he try to stop the manufacturer from helping to give his ideas about metal firepits a wider audience? What if Unger had approached the manufacturer and tried to join forces with him by offering a licensing deal? What if he’d capitalized on the manufacturer’s copies by talking about them on his blog and driving traffic that was looking for the imitator to his site instead? There are a myriad of ways to use a copycat or fight an imitator without joining the system that squelches creativity.
I don’t believe in copyright. I believe in making original work that, in all the ways that matter, cannot be copied and certainly cannot be replaced. The irony is that Unger is doing just that…but he is also buying into the very system that’s intent on destroying him, all artists, and the free-wheeling chaos that is culture.
RELATED ARTICLES:
- Changing ideas about copyright
- The un-myth of originality
- FAIRey USE
CATEGORIES: - Business of art - On free culture - Featuring artists - Reviews -
(2) Comments / Commentaires: John T Unger says “DEFEND ART.”
Gwen is right on again.
The fine art world is a depressing thing to think about.
Im hoping/predicting It will pass in it’s present stage.
There IS huge talent out there within it.
Annie Salness...
Gwenn,
--- -- - --- - ---- - - --- ----- -- -Thank you for thinking, exploring and expressing. I really appreciate your point of view.
It’s got me thinking….