General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGeorge W. Bush Used Top Google Results for All Paintings; Who Will Sue for Copyright Infringement?
George W. Bush Used Top Google Results for All Paintings; Who Will Sue for Copyright Infringement?
Yes, thats right. George W. Bush is an appropriation artist.
While many may have assumed that he used his experience in meeting with those world leaders in order to have an accurate representation of what they looked like, the truth is that he just pulled results from Google Image search result for each one. Literally. Some people have gone through and done Google Image searches on each of the subjects he painted, and discovered that the paintings were clearly all based on either the very first result, or very near the top search result.
Yes, that's right. George W. Bush is an appropriation artist.
Many of those images are from Wikipedia, where they're under Creative Commons licensing, but others are clearly covered by copyright. As Animal New York notes, the image of former French President Jacques Chirac comes from a photo of the cover of Chirac's book cover, where the copyright on the photo is actually held by the Associated Press.
http://animalnewyork.com/2014/george-w-bush-took-paintings-google-images/
http://www.truthdig.com/arts_culture/item/george_w_bush_used_top_google_results_for_paintings_copyright_20140410
Berlum
(7,044 posts)He just cannot muster and Atom of honesty or integrity
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)out of trouble.
brush
(53,871 posts)a beginner stage of artistic development. He has a ways to go to reach a creativity break through to originality.
will NEVER get there
.
period
.
peace brush,
kp
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)It's really not that big a deal.
It's just that I'm in the field and he's giving artists a bad name. So I have to let people know that his stuff is not good just mediocre beginner copying. Certainly not worthy of a one-man show.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)Junior's paintings aren't going to achieve that. So I'm inclined to be generous about it.
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)He has changed them from the originals by painting them. He didn't trace them (I don't think).
edhopper
(33,619 posts)looked traced the Putin and Karsi don't.
I think he does a little of both.
Either way he is a mediocre beginner artist.
But I approve of him staying out of pol8itics and World affairs.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)For a No-Account Guy.
Ms. Toad
(34,093 posts)so they grabbed another one, flipped it, and made up a story about why the image was flipped - when he hadn't flipped any of hte others. (The one above was flipped by the authors - follow the link to see the unflipped )version.
Here's the one he more likely did copy (note the difference in how much neck is showing, the hat, the twinkle in the eyes, the line/scar on the chin (left in the picture), the more flared nostrils, the prominent soul patch).
NV Whino
(20,886 posts)Bush may be a cheat and a bad artist, but this is a non story.
Don't like him, but there are many other things to look at rather than this.
As others have mentioned, copying from photographs is what beginner artists do to learn.
Actually it is the golden age for nude art. Anything and everything you want to try to do, you can see a picture of in the internets.
Supersedeas
(20,630 posts)fill in the blank
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)NV Whino
(20,886 posts)Infringement of Copyrighted Photographs
Under U.S. Copyright law, you violate the copyright owner's exclusive rights of copying and/or to create a derivative work by creating a work that is a copy of or "substantially similar" to another's. The courts determine whether the two works are substantially similar by comparing them and evaluating whether copyrightable elements have been used in the second work. A court is much more likely to find an infringement if the subject of the photo has been "set up" by the photographer and contains creative and original elements, compared to a photograph of subjects that already exist, such as in nature or a structure such as the Golden Gate Bridge.
I haven't seen all these paintings (nor do I want to), but I would guess some of the photographs fall under the "set up" category (formal portraits) and some do not (photo journalism or capturing a photo during an event).
But it is all moot, because it will never go to court.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)mstinamotorcity2
(1,451 posts)Original thought when??? This is not surprising from a man who gave nuclear technology to India for Mangoes!!!
corkhead
(6,119 posts)mstinamotorcity2
(1,451 posts)My Bad!!
UTUSN
(70,744 posts)canoeist52
(2,282 posts)Then it becomes copyright infringement.
progressoid
(49,999 posts)But I highly doubt they will go after Georgie.
dilby
(2,273 posts)I doubt Bush is going to sell his paintings or if there is anyone who would even buy them.
progressoid
(49,999 posts)To further confuse copyright infringement law...Richard Prince won his case.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/26/arts/design/appeals-court-ruling-favors-richard-prince-in-copyright-case.html
bobduca
(1,763 posts)corkhead
(6,119 posts)PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)And he's making bank on them. This isn't real artistry.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)but George Bush killed wayyyyyy more than one man.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)brush
(53,871 posts)Response to kpete (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Gothmog
(145,567 posts)There was an art critic on the Chris Hayes show last night who really did not like Bush's works
Sister to TxTowelie
(117 posts)enfringement? I watched the last few minutes of the show last night, but there were a lot of distractions in the house. I like the substitute host.
Sister to TxTowelie
(117 posts)To me, this is now more of a "craft" that he's doing, not art. He might as well be painting clowns by number.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)jmowreader
(50,562 posts)They're also bad enough that no one would mistake them for the originals.
JI7
(89,274 posts)that he would paint based on that instead of anything deeper . the dumbass was actually president so you would think there would be moments that would stand out or inspire him in his work.
but it's just a google search.