Luc Tuymans Convicted of Plagiarism for Painting Photo of Politician

I guess it's a case of dirivative work .
 
Which just goes to show--NEVER *admit* your source of inspiration. LOL

According to the article, it looks like he will only be fined IF he reproduces the photographer's work again, or shows this one.
I also wonder--it says the painting is now in the hands of a collector--I bet he sold it for a LOT more money than he could have gotten if there hadn't been all the controversy about it.
 
To me it looks recognizable, seems to be a copy of the photo done in a different medium. Maybe it would have been better to use a number of published photos of a person as 'inspiration' and do your own version of someone's likeness in a drawing/painting - or license usage of the photo. I don't know that the artist intended to infringe on copyright but might not have realized he can't make a direct copy of someone else's image.
 
From the article :
“Like many contemporary artists, the work of Luc Tuymans is based on existing images,” De Vroey said after the decision, according to Le Soir. “How can an artist call the world into question with his works if he isn’t allowed to use that world’s images?”

De Vroey is the Luc Tuymans' attorney and is essentially making the argument that artists have to use other peoples images to "call the world into question".

:icon_puke_l:Oh brother! :icon_puke_r:
 
So all cover bands are going to be jailed?
 
Tracing over an image is fast, easy, and accurate. The "artist" no doubt has done this many times before.
 
What kind of a comparison is it though?

Cover bands or the clubs they play in pay the licensing fees to make it legal for them to play the songs.

What licensing fee did the painter pay?

In the general sense of one artist making something that has already been done by another artist their own.
 
What kind of a comparison is it though?

Cover bands or the clubs they play in pay the licensing fees to make it legal for them to play the songs.

What licensing fee did the painter pay?

In the general sense of one artist making something that has already been done by another artist their own.
I still don't get the question about throwing cover bands in jail, when they're following the licensing laws, as some kind of comparison to this painter who did not follow them.

It's like if someone gets a ticket for speeding, and your question is, "so now is everyone who's driving the legal speed limit going to get thrown in jail?"

It just doesn't make any logical sense to me.
 
It seemed to me to simply be hyperbole, wildly exaggerating a situation, not to be taken literally but made to make a point or to be humorous.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top