I find it deeply troubling that the responses to a clear case of =
copyright infringement are to hope no one notices, and that everyone =
else is doing it.
Ask this "artist" how she would feel if someone took a photograph of her =
work and published it as their own.

----------
From:   Melanie Solomon[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Thursday, March 14, 1996 8:45 PM
To:     [log in to unmask]; Multiple recipients of list MUSEUM-L

 on the following:

My situation involved a temporary exhibit.  The artist worked directly =
from a
photo snipped from an old magazine.  She kept no records on the =
photographer,
and thought nothing of recreating the portrait almost exactly (with some
cropping).  I had no idea that this was the case, and I used an image of =
the
painting in a brochure.

So, there was a violation of the photographer's copyright, as well as =
the
magazine's.  But since the artist has no idea where the image came from, =
it
can't be traced.  The one saving grace is that it is probably more than =
20
years old, and thus may fall under the old copyright laws.  I could just =
be
hoping that this is the case!  Hmmm.

I spoke to the artist about this recently, and she is not overly =
concerned.
 Apparently, a lot of artists she knows do this all the time, and she is
willing to pay a fine if the original photographer makes a fuss.

Does this mean we need a preamble to our copyright agreements where the
artist signs a statement saying he/she did not violate anyone else's
copyright in the process of creating their art?  Where will this all =
end?