Dear God, Make Art Thievery Die. Amen.

[Player-X]

Dear God, Make Art Thievery Die. Amen.
[IMG]http://www.juxtapoz.com/img/editorial/07/purple*****_ripped.jpg[/IMG] Note the little red dot on Todd's version indicating it's been sold.

We got an email today about a recent, though (sadly) not isolated, case of artist-on-artist thievery. Today's case involves Todd Goldman of David & Goliath clothing and accessories company. Goldman's work is distributed worldwide through his company and art galleries. It is called "deceptively simple" in a recent press release for his show Gold Digger, currently on exhibit at Jack Gallery in Los Angeles, but the word deceptive apparently goes a bit deeper.

Web cartoonist Dave Kelly created a drawing about five years ago of one of his characters, Purple *****, praying at bedside, "Dear God, Make everyone die. Amen." Goldman has a nearly identical piece in Gold Digger which he's selling as if it's his original creation (see for yourself.) This isn't his only rendition of the piece he copied. There's another more direct rip-off here. Calls to the gallery for comment were forwarded to a surely over-worked and under-whelmed vice-president at the parent company of the gallery who has yet to respond.

This story broke in the Something Awful forums. The discussion can be seen here, The Something Awful Forums. More info (and commentary) here: Fleen: Your Favorite Faux-Muckrakers Since 2005

It happens. It happens a lot, actually. It's usually someone with more money and influence taking ideas from and credit for the work of an independent artist. There is often little, if any, recourse for a person being taken advantage of in this way. Copyright and intellectual property laws are nebulous, legal representation is rarely free, plus filing a lawsuit and seeing it through is a huge burden on people just trying to live their lives. There's a website devoted to calling out art thieves, www.youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com. Their focus is on companies ripping off artists, not artist-on-artist copying, which, as they point out, can get real *****y. The case at hand sits on the fence though between artist vs. artist and company vs. artist. Goldman has a company that sells things with his artwork, so he is both. It can be a murky debate. YTWWN has a set of rules for clarifying situations in which "copying" may not be as nefarious as it might seem.
Another facet of this situation is when artists claim they've been ripped off but haven't. That happens too. Take, for instance, the case of LOVE and HATE. Many people know the famous sculpture by Robert Indiana titled "LOVE". It is iconic. Tributes, rip-offs, renditions and re-interpretations of "LOVE" are plentiful.
Indiana [photo by Bob Krist] (left), Gein (right)

Shortly after we published photos from Eleven at Leonard Street Gallery in London on March 12th, we received multiple emails from friends of Los Angeles-based "un-pop" artist, Gidget Gein, claiming that we were perpetrating art thievery by posting this photo of a series of pieces by DFace...
From our coverage of Eleven: Shepard Fairey and DFace (photo by Chris Osburn)

Claims of rip-offery in this case are insulting to artists who actually are ripped off. Neither Gein's nor DFace's pieces are particularly original and both fall under the category of parody/inspiration.

Appropriating someone else's original artwork, selling it and putting that money in your bank account may not be deemed technically illegal, but those of us with a conscience know that it's wrong.

—ert o'hara, Juxtapoz Art & Culture Magazine (I sincerely yet somewhat ironically apologize to the photographers whose pictures I swiped but did not credit [because I didn't find a byline] to make my point in this story.)

Remember to register your intellectual property.

[Vanit]

Some people don't realise there's a difference between thievery and appropriation, which is what the article was getting at towards the end. The difference is that the original artwork is of an object, and the appropriated art may contain that object, but it in itself is not the objective of the new artwork.

In anycase, this wasn't appropriation and I feel sorry for the guy on the net that got ripped.

[Player-X]

The original art that god ripped seems traced over as some parts of the rip off exactly match the original.