amanda palmer's open poem to jonathan chait (and other crimes)

He probably also realizes the importance of getting things in writing. Did the photographer have them sign a contract for these? Garbage being one of the biggest bands in the world in 1995, I would hope so.

i don't understand what your line of questioning has to do with the facts of the sutuation

Contracts typically hold a lot of weight in legal matters.

adam, garbage management wouldn't have contacted him if there wasn't a contract

i wonder how he'd react if billy corgan's management was like "hey billy wants to put an outtake you produced on a little collection of songs for his bestest of fans, would it be cool if he didn't pay you your royalty, he runs his own label now"

how butch, i mean

how butch, i mean

in case anyone else is confused.

1. professional photographers own their work, license it, and get a royalty

2. garbage management asked this guy to waive his royalty for their fun little book of memories as the band is now working at a smaller scale

3. having already been burnt by their label re-using a pic (and yes, he could have sued, but hopefully it's not hard to realize the career and financial cons of that) and knowing garbage has made public pronouncements about how artists should conduct themselves, the photog noted that he too is an artist and that he should be allotted the same respect they'd want

4. garbage was like "damn man we just asked for a favor geez we do pals favors all the time, thought you were a pal"

5. dude responds "YOU COULD HAVE ASKED ME YOURSELF"

6. the internet has a think

and even if you find this all a bit gauche and piddly (can't imagine his photo would cost much more than meal), the only reason to be on team garbage here is if you too are so through the looking glass that you don't know the difference between doing something and having your "team" do it, or if you're secretly one of those guys in the band not named shirley or butch

No im just saying from a purely legal standpoint, it sounds like he fucked up point 1. We are assuming management contacted him because they had a contract between him and them. If he was due royalties from a legally binding contract then you would assume they would offer him that rather than just credit. If the contract did not stipulate long term licensing then why should they be compelled to offer royalties?

There is a difference between having your royalty waved and not be entitled to it in the first place. It sounds as if they looked at his contract, realized they did not legally owe him money, and contacted him based on that reading of it. Maybe you are right and they read the contract and decided to try and get him to wave his right to license the work. But that would be legally fishy and seriously undermine any potential court case that resulted.

The only way to truly know would be to look at the contract.

"We are assuming management contacted him because they had a contract between him and them. "

I think you're the only one assuming this. they contacted him bc they wanted the picture

DC already laid it out

And they just remembered his name for 20 years.

https://images.google.com/

It's true there may not have been a set rate, but clearly the band at least needed permission. I highly doubt he "fucked up" to the point where they could release a book of his photos whenever they wanted and simply asked for permission out of respect.

If anyone other than the photographer would own his professional pics of garbage from the 90s, it would be the label.

adam, fotogs don't need a contract in order to retain ownership of their rights to the photos they take.

Or whoever published them. So yeah there's probably not a set contract with garbage sorry if I implied that. But there's still no reason to talk about this in "purely legal" terms cuz he didn't accuse them of a crime, just being shitty-to-unethical.

Xpost

and they can make up whatever terms they like, on a case by case basis. "i give YOU the rights to this photo in perpetuity on all platforms without crediting me, for free" but to someone else they can say "i give YOU the rights to use this on your website for the next 10 years, but not on social media or in print, and you have to credit me, and it costs £350"

Ok, I see your point. I'm coming from a videography background, and whenever we do a shoot we make sure to get release forms signed from everyone filmed, no matter how small or insignificant their participation in the project. The assumption of a contract is me extrapolating from personal experience but that is w video and if it is different in the fotog world then I guess I'm wrong there.

When I worked for a magazine that used a lot of photos, we used to have varying levels of "rights" we would purchase from the photographer. "First rights" was we got to be the first person to publish the photos, and after a certain amount of time (a year, maybe) the photographer could re-sell them to another magazine - that was known as "second" or "third" rights, and cost substantially less - like, 20-25% of "first rights." We could also buy "world rights," which was "we now own these photos, not you, and we can use them as many times as we want, forever."

http://www.newstatesman.com/2015/05/saying-unsayable-art-spiegelmans-new-statesman-cover-revealed

On Thursday, we are publishing a special issue of the New Statesman, guest edited by Neil Gaiman and Amanda Palmer. The theme is "saying the unsayable" and there are contributions from Michael Sheen, Kazuo Ishiguro, Andrew O'Neill, Stephen Fry, Nick Cave, Roxane Gay, Khaled Hosseini, JR, Lenny Henry and Laurie Penny, among many others.

Oh good, Andrew O'Neill could do with a publicity boost.

JR?

wrote a well-regarded monograph on fly-fishing iirc

hardly

http://e2.365dm.com/13/07/4-3/20/joe-root-copy-ashes_2967785.jpg?20130704115110

look on the bright side, at least one of that lot is going to come out as a nonce

this is gonna provide enough zing fuel to see us thru to 2016

JR?
― Is It Any Wonder I'm Not the (President Keyes), Tuesday, May 26, 2015 10:56 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

http://www.wwe.com/f/styles/superstar_bio/public/talent/bio/2012/02/jim_ross_bio.png

They didn't go with that front cover in the end, Palmer and Gaiman's mugs on the front.

There's an article by ex-ILXoR Geeta as well - between her, Andrew and Laurie, I should probably pick this up, huh.

amanda palmer would like to talk to you about hitler

http://www.newstatesman.com/2015/05/playing-hitler-card

hitler, guys

th;dr

“If you must use a Nazi as an example, darling, you’d be better off using Mengele. He was the one who did unthinkably gruesome experiments on pregnant women and their babies.”

“Thank you for that lovely image.” I looked down at my swelling belly. “But that’s not a meme. You don’t ‘play the Mengele Card’ . . . Most younger people probably won’t know who that is.”

“He was the villain in William Goldman’s Marathon Man.”

“Don’t change the subject. This isn’t about books. This is about Hitler.”

Neil sighed. I sighed back. This conversation was going nowhere.

so the reality show will happen once the kid is born i guess?

It was the realisation that I was more alone than I had thought in my stance on compassion, expression and how we use art to cope with tragedy. How dare you empathise WITH A MURDERER?

love how she thinks that is the real reason why people raged at her for the poem

(like it was prob the reason for some righties or w/e but that outrage is always there and it was not really the primary source of the backlash to that idiotic impulse of hers)

they conflated marathon man with boys from brazil smdh

ha ha I don't understand Neil's position in that argument

Neil sighed.

lol

It's so exasperating when you try to correct her choice of Nazi and she just won't listen.

Manic pixie Nazi-empathizing dreamgirl

omg

th;dr

thank you for this

was gonna say, that is gonna get some use on my end as well

her essay is supposed to be about Hitler, but she makes it all about herself, good fucking lord!

lol

even when I sympathize with her point she makes it in the stupidest most obnoxious way possible

That's pretty much her m.o.

she's at a friend's deathbed and is p much liveblogging his death w/fb photos etc