Ward Churchill Caught Copying Artwork and Selling It As His Own...
MikeSoja
http://cgi.tw.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=360&item=7301790643&rd=1
The story:
http://news4colorado.com/topstories/local_story_055200531.html
CBS4 Denver | news4colorado.com
'Original' Churchill Art Piece Creates Controversy
by CBS4 News reporter Raj Chohan and news4colorado.com staff
Feb 24, 2005 8:03 pm US/Mountain
An exclusive report by CBS4 News indicates embattled University of
Colorado professor Ward Churchill may have broken copyright law by
making a mirror image of an artist's work and selling it as his own.
Placing Churchill's work beside that of renowned artist Thomas E.
Mails and the two look like mirror images. But one is a copyrighted
drawing. The other is an autographed print by Churchill.
When CBS4 News reporter Raj Chohan tried to talk to Churchill about
a possible copyright infringement, he received an angry response.
The following text is a transcription from CBS4's footage of the
exchange between Chohan and Churchill on Thursday in the hallway
outside his office.
"Get that camera out of my face," Churchill said.
"This is an artwork we've got called 'Winter Attack.' It looks like
it was based on a Thomas Mails painting; it looks like you ripped it
off. Can you tell us about that?" Chohan asked.
That prompted Churchill to take a swing at Chohan while he held a
stack of papers in his hand.
The exchange continued:
Chohan: "Sir, that's assault, you can't do that. Can I ask you about
this? It looks like you copied it."
Churchill: "I was just grabbed by the arm. And that (camera) gets
out of my face."
Chohan: "Sir, we're allowed to take these pictures, this is a public
space."
Churchill: "You're not allowed to grab be by the arm."
Chohan: "He didn't touch you sir, we've got it all on tape. Sir,
this is called Winter Attack. It's a serigraph by you. It looks like
it was copied from Thomas Mails artwork. Can we talk to you about
that please?"
* * *
Churchill made the serigraph in question in 1981 and called it
"Winter Attack." He printed 150 copies and sold one of them to Duke
Prentup for about $100.
"I have enjoyed them ever since, immensely," Prentup said. "They're,
obviously, up in my house."
But last month came a stunning revelation. As Prentup flipped
through a book of illustrations by renowned artist Thomas E. Mails,
he found an artwork of striking similarity.
"And I opened it up and, wham! There it was," Prentup said. "It's
the exact same thing, only mirror image, virtually to every detail."
The pen and ink sketch by Thomas Mails first appeared in his 1972
masterpiece, "The Mystic Warriors of the Plains."
Compare it side-by-side to the serigraph by Churchill, created some
20 years later: the composition, the images, the placement are
nearly identical.
Intellectual property attorney Jim Hubbell said it's clearly no
accident.
"It's very obvious that the Churchill piece was taken directly from
the Mails piece," Hubbell said. "There's just too many similarities
between the two for it to have been coincidence."
Several minutes after CBS4's first encounter with Churchill, he
emerged from his office and was willing to talk. He acknowledged his
artwork was based on the Thomas Mails piece. And, he said he
disclosed that during his initial release of the serigraph.
"It is an original art work by me, after Thomas Mails," Churchill
said. "The fact that the purchaser was ignorant of the reality of
what was perfectly publicly stated at the time the edition was
printed is not my responsibility."
A closer examination of the Churchill piece revealed there is no
credit given to the original artist. Churchill also refused to
provide CBS4 with documentation that would prove his claims.
But even if it exists, it wouldn't be enough to protect Churchill
from copyright infringement unless he had permission from the
copyright holder.
"Unless there was consent for Churchill to do the piece, then there
is a copyright infringement here," Hubbell said.
When contacted at his home in North Carolina, Ryan Mails, the son of
the late Thomas Mails said the family still retained the copyrights
to the drawings of the Mystic Warriors book, and that his father
fiercely defended the copyrights.
"My father invested a great deal of himself in his work, and from
that he developed a great fierceness in defending his work," Mails'
son said. "I cannot imagine he would ever grant permission to anyone
to copy one of his pieces."
Back in Prentup's Boulder County home, the Churchill serigraph still
hangs. One quarter Native American himself, Prentup said he loves
the image; he's just not sure whose artwork it really is.
"Sure, it makes me angry, it makes me very disappointed," Prentup
said. "I wanted some original artwork from what appeared to be a
very good local artist. Now I don't know what I've got."
A quick Internet search indicates a number of Churchill pieces
selling on eBay, including another copy of "Winter Attack."
Certainly, part of the buzz for these art works is the ongoing
controversy surrounding Churchill.
University of Colorado Regents are investigating Churchill's work at
the university. They are expected to return a decision on whether he
has violated tenure by early March.
CBS4 Video:
Churchill's Aggressive Response To Artwork Controversy
Š 2005 news4colorado.com. All Rights Reserved.
.
Fat, stupid, commie slob Bryan Jamieson demonstrating
the brains that led him to Marxism:
"Something struck the Pentagon. That much is obvious. But is
was something much smaller than a 767. A missile, perhaps."
"Demonstrate that Flight 77 struck the Pentagon. Explain how a
757 could sustain level flight just ten feet from the ground for
several hundred yards, and explain how the plane could utterly
vanish, leaving only an unburned but crumpled engine cowling, in
a twenty foot hold."
"I don't have a theory as to what happened to Flight 77. But
I'm convinced it did not strike the Pentagon."
"It has again occurred to me that at the Pentagon, no such
aircraft remnants whatsoever were ever reported being
photographed, ever reported being seen by any eyewitnesses, or
ever reported being recovered from the site. Not to mention seat
fragments, luggage, body parts, etc. Zip."
"I'm disputing that it was even a plane that hit the Pentagon."
"[T]he one I find most troubling; that the plane struck a
utility pole on the way in and a wing sheared off. That should
have left a large amount of indisputable debris well outside the
building. It's also impossible to envision the plane not going
into a wild spin at that moment and immediately losing all
control, especially if the remaining engine was still powered
up."
"Nor do I have any solid conjectures on what DID hit the
Pentagon. It was too big for a shoulder mounted rocket, too
small to be any sort of manned vehicle, which leaves SAMs or
AGMs."
American Truth
"MikeSoja" <mso...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:4u01211fuc6bp1r98...@4ax.com...
Churchill will scalp you for selling him that cheap firewater, stupid white
man.
Snake Byte
> Churchill will scalp you for selling him that cheap firewater, stupid white
> man.
>
>
Churchill knows nothing about scalping since he's a fake injun.
Churchill's delusions probably comes from a medicine man who gave him too
much peyote.
You must be a fake American, stupid Nintendo warrior.
--
Question - What is the difference between a liberal and a puppy?
Answer -A puppy stops whining after it grows up.
MikeSoja
>On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 09:20:17 -0500, MikeSoja <mso...@newsguy.com>
>wrote:
>>One of Churchills ripped-off works is For Sale on eBay:
>Or so it's alleged.
If you visit the two links I gave ya, Gar, there's not much, if
anything, left to the imagination. There's the original work of art
by Mails, and then there's the reversed copy of the thing signed by
Ward Churchill, at least one copy of which is for sale on eBay.
A story up via Drudge now says one of the eBay auctions has been
ended early because of copyright concerns. The one running on a
foreign server is still alive. It's your chance, Gar, to own a real
"plagiarized" piece of work by a commie scumbag incompetent who is
soon to be out of a job.
>You do know the difference between "proof" and "allegation", right,
>MIKEY?
>Oh, sorry
>You support those dumb asshole who interchanged allegation,
>insinuation, conjecture, theory, rumor, story and lie with "truth",
>aren't you?
"It is an original art work by me, after Thomas Mails," Churchill
said. "The fact that the purchaser was ignorant of the reality of
what was perfectly publicly stated at the time the edition was
printed is not my responsibility."
A closer examination of the Churchill piece revealed there is no
credit given to the original artist. Churchill also refused to
provide CBS4 with documentation that would prove his claims.
//--end excerpt
What part of the story is missing, Gar. The signed confession?
Your willful suspension of reality?
Mike Soja