obama joker artist...
3 views
Skip to first unread message
edward przydzial
Sep 6, 2009, 4:46:26 PM9/6/09
to edward przydzial internet group, vipe...@yahoo.com
وهناك 45 عاما) وهو مدرس في كلية الفنون البولندية / النسب النمساوي الذي
أيد النائب سارة بالين (نائب)
ترشيح نفسه للرئاسة هو الفنان المجهول الذي تحول لمجلة / / تايم تغطية
صورة باراك حسين
أوباما في جوكر الشائنة من سلسلة باتمان ، وكانت صحيفة لوس انجليس تايمز
قد ذكرت يوم الثلاثاء.
إدوارد przydział كان منزله في بيفرلي هيلز يوم اجازته منتصف من معهد
الفن عندما كان يلهو حولها
مع فوتوشوب للخروج من الصورة. انه نشر على الموقع صورة فليكر لرؤية
أصدقاء له
العمل الفني ، وفقا لما ذكرته الصحيفة.
أشهر في وقت لاحق ، وقال انه تلاعب في الصورة ، ويبدو على ملصقات في جميع
أنحاء البلاد مع الكلمة
"الاشتراكية" تضاف إلى ذلك. przydział ، الذي يبلل في الفنون التصويرية ،
وقال للصحيفة انه قلق
التعدي على حق المؤلف وحتى توارت عن الانظار. كما انه يخشى من رد فعل
عنيف من أجل الظهور أن تكون ضد
الرئيس.
przydział قال انه لا يؤيد اوباما ، رغم انه تضليل يحبه أكثر من الرئيس
بوش. وقال إنه لا
اعتقد انه من الاشتراكية ، والفاشية.
"وفي مجال السياسة الداخلية ، لا اعتقد انه فعلا يفعل الكثير من الخير
لهذا البلد الحق الان"
صحيفة نيويورك تايمز. واضاف "اننا لا نملك ل' عبادة البطل 'الرجل".
أغسطس 18th فوكس نيوز
more;
http://przydzialobamajoker.blogspot.com/
by Thomas Hawk
For the past week or so I’ve been reporting on the DMCA takedown case
involving Flickr user Firas Alkhateeb. By way of background, Alkhateeb
had uploaded the controversial Obama/Joker image to his Flickr account
in January of 2009. The image garnered over 20,000 views and many
comments before Flickr staff removed the image from the site. The Los
Angeles Times subsequently reported an article identifying Alkhateeb
as the author of the original and controversial Obama/Joker image also
noting the Flickr had removed Alkhateeb’s image from their site.
After a number of negative articles over the removal of what seemed
like a fair use parody image, Flickr responded publicly in justifying
their actions for removing Alkhateeb’s image citing a DMCA takedown
notice that they said they received without identifying who had sent
it. Initially many assumed that Time or DC Comics may have requested
the takedown.
Subsequently PDN contacted representatives from Time, DC Comics and
Platon (the photographer who had taken the original photograph which
was remixed into the Obama Joker) who all denied sending Flickr a DMCA
takedown notice over the issue. Although at first Alkhateeb had said
that he did not know who had filed the DMCA takedown notice but
assumed it was Time, after he revisited the email that Flickr had sent
him over its removal he was able to confirm the identity of the
individual who had filed it.
Yesterday evening Alkhateeb shared with me the name that Flickr had
provided him as the person who filed the DMCA notice against him,
“Edward Przydzia.” He asked me initially not to publish this name but
has subsequently given me permission. The email that Alkhateeb said
Flickr sent him is below:
“Dear khateeb88,
We have received a Notice of Infringement from Edward
Przydzia via the Yahoo! Copyright Team and have removed the
photo “Obama the Joker” from your photostream.
Subsequent NOIs filed against your account will result in
further action that may include termination without
warning.
If you believe that you were designated by mistake or
misidentification, or if you believe that you have not
infringed the copyright, you may submit a sworn
counter-notification as to the mistake or
misidentification.
Please contact the Yahoo! Copyright Team for more
information on this process:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/copyright/copyright.html
- Flickr Team”
After learning the identity of the person who had allegedly had filed
a DMCA notice against Alkhateeb, I began trying to research “Edward
Przydzia.” A Google search of the name “Edward Przydzia” yielded no
results for that name specifically which made me wonder as to the
legitimacy of the takedown notice. Earlier today I blogged the story
“Does Flickr Censor User Content Over Blatantly Fake DMCA Notices?” in
response to being unable to associate the Edward Przdzia name with
anyone who would appear to have a legitimate IP interest in the Obama/
Joker Image.
Later this afternoon I began searching variations of the “Edward
Przydzia” name and was able to come up with an “Edward Przydzial” who
has, it seems, made claims, online at least, that he is the originator
of the Joker/Obama image not Alkhateeb. So I suspect that it may have
been Edward Przydzial, someone with at least a stated IP interest in
the Joker/Obama image, who filed the DMCA takedown notice with Flickr.
I’ve emailed and facebook mailed Edward Przydzia asking him to confirm
if he in fact filed the DMCA takedown notice and if he is indeed
claiming ownership over the Joker/Obama image but have not heard back
from him as of yet. I will report back once I do hear from him.
There is at least one post on what appears to be Przydzial’s Live
Journal page showing a version of the Time Joker/Obama image dated
October 9th, 2008 (before Alkhateeb’s January post of the same image
on Flickr)
When I asked Alkhateeb about that October posting from Przydzial this
is what he replied to me:
“I don’t know how livejournal works but I can assure you 100% that I
made this image in december/january this past winter. I have the
original file on my computer with date created/modified data to prove
so. The images he has on his site are copies he must have taken off
the internet. The one with the socialism caption is an image that’s
been on several news sites and was taken of a poster on the street in
LA in early august. If you do a google news image search youll find
the exact same photo of the poster. You can easily tell its a photo of
a poster on the street. It’s impossible for that livejournal to be
authentic if an image he has in it thats dated October 9th is a photo
that was taken 3 weeks ago.”
In digging further into who Przydzial is online I was able to find
this press release about him suing Gene Simmons from the band Kiss
over unauthorized use of his photographs. The press release, however,
does seem suspect, having been issued by presscorp.blogspot.com — a
blog it seems that has existed only to issue this single press release
about Przydzial’s case against the famous Kiss vocalist Gene Simmons.
In another post on a Kiss forum board refuting Przydzial’s claim
against Simons he is referred to as a “fraud” and “good ol crazy
Edward Przydzial (not his real name).” I think I found Przydzial’s
Flickr page here. Several forums online make reference to what is
supposedly an April 25, 1988 article about Przdzial from the Detroit
news alleging that he spent time in Federal prison “for multiple
counts of fraud and interstate transportation of property obtained by
fraud.”
Here is another article about Przydzial and a sort of odd post
apparently written by him representing the “Associate Press” on April
3rd 2009 regarding the Obama image.
Update: I received a reply back this morning from Przydzial to my
Facebook message asking him if he filed the DMCA takedown notice
against Firas and if he is claiming ownership to the Obama image. Here
is his reply back to me: “i do not own the image. time magazine
photographer does… i am the “creator” of said image not firas
whatever. i posted them in los angeles and they went viral. he is
stealing my thunder. btw, my intention was not to make money off of or
sell this as a way to make money… this art was designed to wake
american’s up to obama’s false healthcare reform. the photoshop is all
i’m claiming. as far as flickr goes… you’ll need a court order for
flickr to inform you of identity status for dmca takedown notice… if
flickr has a court order to release that info, that’s news to me.”
Update #2: I just received back a second reply facebook mail to my
reasking Edward the question as to whether or not he filed this DMCA
takedown notice and this is what he replied:
“i’m finding you have already posted a blog about me, made your
assumptions and printed all type of trash that has been deemed
harassment. the links to all the false federal blah, blah, blah… same
old “he’s a crook” crap. i voted for bush twice and i was no way
voting obama. your article is somewhat confussing even to me. i’m not
sure what your major malfunction is…? i’m not pursuing anyone just
promoting the poster. many blogs want me to speak but since it’s been
turned into a liberal slant i’d rather not comment. i will continue to
make my claims. firas is lying. flickr would need a court order to do
that. ask him to show you his court ordered document with the judges
signature on it… then maybe i’ll answer your question.”
I think I’m probably done with this one for a while.
When 20-year-old college student Firas Alkhateeb posted a picture of
President Obama decked out in Joker facepaint to photo-sharing website
Flickr, little did he know that he was going to be the catalyst for a
major policy change in how the Yahoo-owned company will handle
copyright infringement claims. However, that’s exactly what happened.
Thanks to massive outcry from the online community, Yahoo’s legal team
allowed Flickr to put the photo’s web page back up. Not the image
itself, mind you, but the photo’s page…along with all its accompanying
metadata like date posted, tags, and most importantly, user comments.
Sponsor
The Story So Far
If you haven’t been following the story (see our initial coverage here
and here), the short summary goes like this: Chicago resident Firas
Alkhateeb created an image that showed President Obama wearing the
makeup of the Joker. He used an image of the President snagged from
TIME magazine’s October 23rd, 2006 cover. After uploading his photo to
Flickr, an unknown third party doctored the image some more adding the
word “socialism” beneath the picture. This doctored image started
showing up plastered across cities nationwide as well as on numerous
political bloggers’ websites.
Flickr, after having received a DMCA take-down notice, removed the
photo from Firas’ account. They did this despite the fact that the
image could easily be argued to fall into the grey area of “political
parody” and the copyright infringement claim itself comes from a
character with a questionable background himself and not, as it turns
out, from TIME magazine, DC Comics, nor the photographer who took the
original photo. Instead, the supposedly infringed-upon party, a Mr.
Edward Przydzial, is a freelance photographer whose only proof of his
claim comes from a LiveJournal post dated Oct. 9th. Blog posts are
easy to backdate which makes the claim questionable in the eyes of the
law.
To make matters worse, the case highlighted a problem with Flickr’s
takedown policy which appears to be “delete first, ask questions
later.”
Flickr User Suggests a Policy Change, Flickr Agrees
While for the most part Flickr is standing behind their actions,
saying that the law leaves them no choice but to remove images upon
receipt of a takedown notice, they have been open to discussion about
better ways to comply with the letter of the law without impacting the
Flickr community so much as before.
In a forum posting on the photo-sharing site, a Flickr user by the
name of “The Searcher” debating the company’s DCMA policy, offered the
company a suggestion. Instead of simply deleting the photo page in its
entirety, the company should just replace the image itself with a
blank that reads “this image has been removed for copyright issues,”
wrote the user. Flickr’s director of community Heather Champ replied
saying she liked the idea and would push it up the food chain. And
that she did.
According to her follow up post, Flickr decided to make a change to
the way they handle takedown notices and, going forward, they will no
longer delete the entire photo page, just the image itself. A
screenshot of how this will look is posted here and, as suggested, it
will feature text that reads: “This image has been removed due to a
claim of copyright infringement.”
As Champ explains, this notable change will preserve the photo’s
metadata while still complying with the law. Other policies remain the
same. For example, members will still be warned, by way a private
message, who is making the claim against them. Flickr will remove the
image from the site and will store it so that it can be replaced in
the event that the U.S. Copyright Team gives them the go-ahead to do
so. Now, however, the existing title, description, comments, tags,
notes, etc. on the original photo page will remain available and the
photo can still be added to sets and groups. Champ says Flickr will
also be reaching out to the copyright teams in other parts of the
world to see if they’re interested in enacting the same policy. (The
current policy is specific to the U.S. where the DMCA law is
enforced.)
Overall, the community received the news positively, even though it
still allows Flickr to eschew any responsibility of investigating the
validity of DMCA copyright claims themselves. The company will
continue to delete away no matter who asks, it seems - a move that
drew ire from Techcrunch’s Michael Arrington who said they should have
checked with their lawyers first before yanking the image.
Photographer and rival service Zooomr exec Thomas Hawk also questioned
whether the removal was simply sheer incompetence on Flickr’s part.
Ultimately, the change is a good one. It’s better for the online
community and the photographer whose image is removed, while still
respecting the rights of the supposed copyright victim. However, the
real problem here may not be how Flickr deals with copyright claims,
but the DMCA law itself.
أيد النائب سارة بالين (نائب)
ترشيح نفسه للرئاسة هو الفنان المجهول الذي تحول لمجلة / / تايم تغطية
صورة باراك حسين
أوباما في جوكر الشائنة من سلسلة باتمان ، وكانت صحيفة لوس انجليس تايمز
قد ذكرت يوم الثلاثاء.
إدوارد przydział كان منزله في بيفرلي هيلز يوم اجازته منتصف من معهد
الفن عندما كان يلهو حولها
مع فوتوشوب للخروج من الصورة. انه نشر على الموقع صورة فليكر لرؤية
أصدقاء له
العمل الفني ، وفقا لما ذكرته الصحيفة.
أشهر في وقت لاحق ، وقال انه تلاعب في الصورة ، ويبدو على ملصقات في جميع
أنحاء البلاد مع الكلمة
"الاشتراكية" تضاف إلى ذلك. przydział ، الذي يبلل في الفنون التصويرية ،
وقال للصحيفة انه قلق
التعدي على حق المؤلف وحتى توارت عن الانظار. كما انه يخشى من رد فعل
عنيف من أجل الظهور أن تكون ضد
الرئيس.
przydział قال انه لا يؤيد اوباما ، رغم انه تضليل يحبه أكثر من الرئيس
بوش. وقال إنه لا
اعتقد انه من الاشتراكية ، والفاشية.
"وفي مجال السياسة الداخلية ، لا اعتقد انه فعلا يفعل الكثير من الخير
لهذا البلد الحق الان"
صحيفة نيويورك تايمز. واضاف "اننا لا نملك ل' عبادة البطل 'الرجل".
أغسطس 18th فوكس نيوز
more;
http://przydzialobamajoker.blogspot.com/
by Thomas Hawk
For the past week or so I’ve been reporting on the DMCA takedown case
involving Flickr user Firas Alkhateeb. By way of background, Alkhateeb
had uploaded the controversial Obama/Joker image to his Flickr account
in January of 2009. The image garnered over 20,000 views and many
comments before Flickr staff removed the image from the site. The Los
Angeles Times subsequently reported an article identifying Alkhateeb
as the author of the original and controversial Obama/Joker image also
noting the Flickr had removed Alkhateeb’s image from their site.
After a number of negative articles over the removal of what seemed
like a fair use parody image, Flickr responded publicly in justifying
their actions for removing Alkhateeb’s image citing a DMCA takedown
notice that they said they received without identifying who had sent
it. Initially many assumed that Time or DC Comics may have requested
the takedown.
Subsequently PDN contacted representatives from Time, DC Comics and
Platon (the photographer who had taken the original photograph which
was remixed into the Obama Joker) who all denied sending Flickr a DMCA
takedown notice over the issue. Although at first Alkhateeb had said
that he did not know who had filed the DMCA takedown notice but
assumed it was Time, after he revisited the email that Flickr had sent
him over its removal he was able to confirm the identity of the
individual who had filed it.
Yesterday evening Alkhateeb shared with me the name that Flickr had
provided him as the person who filed the DMCA notice against him,
“Edward Przydzia.” He asked me initially not to publish this name but
has subsequently given me permission. The email that Alkhateeb said
Flickr sent him is below:
“Dear khateeb88,
We have received a Notice of Infringement from Edward
Przydzia via the Yahoo! Copyright Team and have removed the
photo “Obama the Joker” from your photostream.
Subsequent NOIs filed against your account will result in
further action that may include termination without
warning.
If you believe that you were designated by mistake or
misidentification, or if you believe that you have not
infringed the copyright, you may submit a sworn
counter-notification as to the mistake or
misidentification.
Please contact the Yahoo! Copyright Team for more
information on this process:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/copyright/copyright.html
- Flickr Team”
After learning the identity of the person who had allegedly had filed
a DMCA notice against Alkhateeb, I began trying to research “Edward
Przydzia.” A Google search of the name “Edward Przydzia” yielded no
results for that name specifically which made me wonder as to the
legitimacy of the takedown notice. Earlier today I blogged the story
“Does Flickr Censor User Content Over Blatantly Fake DMCA Notices?” in
response to being unable to associate the Edward Przdzia name with
anyone who would appear to have a legitimate IP interest in the Obama/
Joker Image.
Later this afternoon I began searching variations of the “Edward
Przydzia” name and was able to come up with an “Edward Przydzial” who
has, it seems, made claims, online at least, that he is the originator
of the Joker/Obama image not Alkhateeb. So I suspect that it may have
been Edward Przydzial, someone with at least a stated IP interest in
the Joker/Obama image, who filed the DMCA takedown notice with Flickr.
I’ve emailed and facebook mailed Edward Przydzia asking him to confirm
if he in fact filed the DMCA takedown notice and if he is indeed
claiming ownership over the Joker/Obama image but have not heard back
from him as of yet. I will report back once I do hear from him.
There is at least one post on what appears to be Przydzial’s Live
Journal page showing a version of the Time Joker/Obama image dated
October 9th, 2008 (before Alkhateeb’s January post of the same image
on Flickr)
When I asked Alkhateeb about that October posting from Przydzial this
is what he replied to me:
“I don’t know how livejournal works but I can assure you 100% that I
made this image in december/january this past winter. I have the
original file on my computer with date created/modified data to prove
so. The images he has on his site are copies he must have taken off
the internet. The one with the socialism caption is an image that’s
been on several news sites and was taken of a poster on the street in
LA in early august. If you do a google news image search youll find
the exact same photo of the poster. You can easily tell its a photo of
a poster on the street. It’s impossible for that livejournal to be
authentic if an image he has in it thats dated October 9th is a photo
that was taken 3 weeks ago.”
In digging further into who Przydzial is online I was able to find
this press release about him suing Gene Simmons from the band Kiss
over unauthorized use of his photographs. The press release, however,
does seem suspect, having been issued by presscorp.blogspot.com — a
blog it seems that has existed only to issue this single press release
about Przydzial’s case against the famous Kiss vocalist Gene Simmons.
In another post on a Kiss forum board refuting Przydzial’s claim
against Simons he is referred to as a “fraud” and “good ol crazy
Edward Przydzial (not his real name).” I think I found Przydzial’s
Flickr page here. Several forums online make reference to what is
supposedly an April 25, 1988 article about Przdzial from the Detroit
news alleging that he spent time in Federal prison “for multiple
counts of fraud and interstate transportation of property obtained by
fraud.”
Here is another article about Przydzial and a sort of odd post
apparently written by him representing the “Associate Press” on April
3rd 2009 regarding the Obama image.
Update: I received a reply back this morning from Przydzial to my
Facebook message asking him if he filed the DMCA takedown notice
against Firas and if he is claiming ownership to the Obama image. Here
is his reply back to me: “i do not own the image. time magazine
photographer does… i am the “creator” of said image not firas
whatever. i posted them in los angeles and they went viral. he is
stealing my thunder. btw, my intention was not to make money off of or
sell this as a way to make money… this art was designed to wake
american’s up to obama’s false healthcare reform. the photoshop is all
i’m claiming. as far as flickr goes… you’ll need a court order for
flickr to inform you of identity status for dmca takedown notice… if
flickr has a court order to release that info, that’s news to me.”
Update #2: I just received back a second reply facebook mail to my
reasking Edward the question as to whether or not he filed this DMCA
takedown notice and this is what he replied:
“i’m finding you have already posted a blog about me, made your
assumptions and printed all type of trash that has been deemed
harassment. the links to all the false federal blah, blah, blah… same
old “he’s a crook” crap. i voted for bush twice and i was no way
voting obama. your article is somewhat confussing even to me. i’m not
sure what your major malfunction is…? i’m not pursuing anyone just
promoting the poster. many blogs want me to speak but since it’s been
turned into a liberal slant i’d rather not comment. i will continue to
make my claims. firas is lying. flickr would need a court order to do
that. ask him to show you his court ordered document with the judges
signature on it… then maybe i’ll answer your question.”
I think I’m probably done with this one for a while.
When 20-year-old college student Firas Alkhateeb posted a picture of
President Obama decked out in Joker facepaint to photo-sharing website
Flickr, little did he know that he was going to be the catalyst for a
major policy change in how the Yahoo-owned company will handle
copyright infringement claims. However, that’s exactly what happened.
Thanks to massive outcry from the online community, Yahoo’s legal team
allowed Flickr to put the photo’s web page back up. Not the image
itself, mind you, but the photo’s page…along with all its accompanying
metadata like date posted, tags, and most importantly, user comments.
Sponsor
The Story So Far
If you haven’t been following the story (see our initial coverage here
and here), the short summary goes like this: Chicago resident Firas
Alkhateeb created an image that showed President Obama wearing the
makeup of the Joker. He used an image of the President snagged from
TIME magazine’s October 23rd, 2006 cover. After uploading his photo to
Flickr, an unknown third party doctored the image some more adding the
word “socialism” beneath the picture. This doctored image started
showing up plastered across cities nationwide as well as on numerous
political bloggers’ websites.
Flickr, after having received a DMCA take-down notice, removed the
photo from Firas’ account. They did this despite the fact that the
image could easily be argued to fall into the grey area of “political
parody” and the copyright infringement claim itself comes from a
character with a questionable background himself and not, as it turns
out, from TIME magazine, DC Comics, nor the photographer who took the
original photo. Instead, the supposedly infringed-upon party, a Mr.
Edward Przydzial, is a freelance photographer whose only proof of his
claim comes from a LiveJournal post dated Oct. 9th. Blog posts are
easy to backdate which makes the claim questionable in the eyes of the
law.
To make matters worse, the case highlighted a problem with Flickr’s
takedown policy which appears to be “delete first, ask questions
later.”
Flickr User Suggests a Policy Change, Flickr Agrees
While for the most part Flickr is standing behind their actions,
saying that the law leaves them no choice but to remove images upon
receipt of a takedown notice, they have been open to discussion about
better ways to comply with the letter of the law without impacting the
Flickr community so much as before.
In a forum posting on the photo-sharing site, a Flickr user by the
name of “The Searcher” debating the company’s DCMA policy, offered the
company a suggestion. Instead of simply deleting the photo page in its
entirety, the company should just replace the image itself with a
blank that reads “this image has been removed for copyright issues,”
wrote the user. Flickr’s director of community Heather Champ replied
saying she liked the idea and would push it up the food chain. And
that she did.
According to her follow up post, Flickr decided to make a change to
the way they handle takedown notices and, going forward, they will no
longer delete the entire photo page, just the image itself. A
screenshot of how this will look is posted here and, as suggested, it
will feature text that reads: “This image has been removed due to a
claim of copyright infringement.”
As Champ explains, this notable change will preserve the photo’s
metadata while still complying with the law. Other policies remain the
same. For example, members will still be warned, by way a private
message, who is making the claim against them. Flickr will remove the
image from the site and will store it so that it can be replaced in
the event that the U.S. Copyright Team gives them the go-ahead to do
so. Now, however, the existing title, description, comments, tags,
notes, etc. on the original photo page will remain available and the
photo can still be added to sets and groups. Champ says Flickr will
also be reaching out to the copyright teams in other parts of the
world to see if they’re interested in enacting the same policy. (The
current policy is specific to the U.S. where the DMCA law is
enforced.)
Overall, the community received the news positively, even though it
still allows Flickr to eschew any responsibility of investigating the
validity of DMCA copyright claims themselves. The company will
continue to delete away no matter who asks, it seems - a move that
drew ire from Techcrunch’s Michael Arrington who said they should have
checked with their lawyers first before yanking the image.
Photographer and rival service Zooomr exec Thomas Hawk also questioned
whether the removal was simply sheer incompetence on Flickr’s part.
Ultimately, the change is a good one. It’s better for the online
community and the photographer whose image is removed, while still
respecting the rights of the supposed copyright victim. However, the
real problem here may not be how Flickr deals with copyright claims,
but the DMCA law itself.
edward przydzial
Sep 6, 2009, 5:00:36 PM9/6/09
to edward przydzial internet group
"ואני חשבתי הבדיחות שלי היו גרועים!" נוחר הית 'לדג' ר הג 'וקר של האביר
האפל. אופיו הוא היום
במרכז של שורה על הומור מפוקפק, אבל זה בכלל לא קשור משתנק שלו. פוסטר
כבר
מופיעות על פני לוס אנג 'לס וחלקים אחרים של ארצות הברית שבה הנשיא ברק
אובמה הוא
מתואר כמו supervillain, עם המילה "סוציאליזם", נכתב מתחת עשה את פניו.
מי כבר
הדבקת את זה לא ידוע ברבים אבל זה מסמן את הפעם הראשונה ייצוג שלילי של
אובמה
צבר גרירה הזרם המרכזי, כמו גם את הזכות להשתמש האמריקני המוצלח הראשון
של אמנות הרחוב. אבל זה
מסוכן? והאם זה טוב?
אמנות רחוב היא באופן מסורתי כלי של disenfranchised ו מחוץ לחוק, והוא
היה זה שגרם הערכיות
השימוש בו על ידי תומכיו של אובמה בבחירות של השנה שעברה - המפורסם ביותר
Shepard Fairey של התמונה התקווה - כך
חזק. כיום, בצדק או לא, רבים ממתנגדיו של אובמה רואים את עצמם מבחוץ
disenfranchised.
הנחת לטעון במצב זה של הביטוי היא דרך חכמה להביע רגש זה, רטורית לציון
הממשל החדש של "הכוח" או אפילו "עריצות", ואת מתנגדי שלה כמו המורדים.
הבחירה של המדיום הוא
חכם. את ההודעה ... לא כל כך הרבה.
כמו הפקעת החזותי הולך, התמונה היא לא ההחלטה קלה. האיקונוגרפיה של הג
'וקר - שיער ירוק, לבן
הפנים ושפתיים אדומות (לפחות בדמות של התגלמות של האביר האפל) שחור
עיניים מכותרת - הוא
אחד מאותם פשוטה, שילובי צבעים נועזים כי להשאיל את עצמם ביישום נרחב.
(אנדי
וורהול, מרילין התמונה היא אחרת, המזוהה גם כאשר מורכבים על אל הולמת
ביותר של נושאים.)
אכן, מסע פרסום לקידום מכירות עבור האביר האפל עשה הרבה עבירות של הג
'וקר
מבט - לעתים קרובות כדי לפשט פרצוף אדום ו-פחם עיניים שחורות - לרבות
השימוש בו על סמלים של אמריקה
פטריוטיות. האוהדים היו בקרוב למצוא משתמש שלהם מבויתות עבור אותו - יחד
עם אדום מתאים
שרה פיילין - זה הפך לנושא של אמריקה הקדושים של בחירה עבור 2008 (מודל
כאן על ידי חצי יצוק של
NBC's The Office).
למעשה, היה כנראה רק תמונה אחת זכו להחזיק יותר על תרבות הפופ האמריקאית
חזותית לאחרונה
בשנה מאשר הג 'וקר של לדג' ר: Fairey של אובמה. לא פוליטיקאי אחר
בהיסטוריה של העת האחרונה - שלא לדבר על עצם
המועמד - יש לו מעמד איקוני שלהם הוקמה במהירות מוצק כמו של אובמה היה
בשנת 2008. עבור
זו הסיבה לבד, את העובדה המראה שלו הג 'וקר של להיות conflated פחות
מפתיע מאשר
העובדה שזה לא קרה קודם. למעשה, בזכות האמן האוסטרלי ג 'יימס Lillis, עשה
את זה, גם אם מ
את הכיוון השני. ואת "החדש" פוסטר היא למעשה די זקנה. הראשון הבחין מוקדם
ככל אפריל
פוסטר מבוסס כנראה על תמונה על ידי שיקגו סטודנט פיראס Khateeb, המועלים
Flickr לפני אובמה
נחנך אפילו. רק עכשיו, עם תוכניות הבריאות של אובמה להפוך מוקד ההתנגדות,
יש
זה תפס.
גם הוא את הרעיון של הג 'וקר העליון החדש. כמו ההערות Newsbusters באתר,
וניטי פייר רץ תמונה לאחרונה
שנה לאחר מכן, הנשיא בוש, עשה מעל à la לדג בלי להתגרות משהו כמו לעורר
את
פוסטר חדש גרם. אלה כוללים בכי רע עכשיו הנשיא של לוס אנג 'לס עירוני
מדיניות שולחן עגול,
ארל Ofari הצ 'ינסון. "המתארת את הנשיא ואת שטנית כמו סוציאליסט החורג
מעבר פוליטית
spoofery, "הצ 'ינסון הדיווחים, אמר." זה מרושע ומסוכן. "
סוציאליסטית, כמובן, היא כמו קבר להשמיץ כפי שניתן מכוונת נגד פוליטיקאי
אמריקאי. אבל היא לא כל
יושב נשיא, אפילו אחד רחב פופולרי, מטרה לגיטימית עבור סאטירה? זה בוודאי
ניתן לצמצמה
היבט של חופש הביטוי כי מנהיגי להתעכב ללעג. אלא לגלוג הכוללת
הסתה לאלימות, בדרך כלל התנגדויות להצטמצם בעניינים של טעם. הכרזה לץ הוא
מתכוון -
רוח, בטוחה, כמו הרבה תמונות סאטירי, אבל זה מסוכן? אם זה הוא, זה מסתכם
גזע.
כמו קריקטורה עם ניו יורק פוסט כי conflated יוזמה אובמה הירי של קוף
רמאי, זה
נקודה שנויה במחלוקת, אם הכוונה היתה bigoted: העובדה הפשוטה של לפרסם
תמונה של שחור
נשיא עם פנים מכוסות איפור לבן שלו אבל העיניים פצע אדום של פה לא יכול
לעזור אבל לעורר אסתטי זמר, גם אם זה הפוך. ויכוח יכול להיות כי
פוטנציאל דלקתיות של דימויים כאלה עשוי להכריע כל ערך סאטירי
פוטנציאליים. זה,
מן הסתם, מה הוא אומר על ידי הצ 'ינסון "מסוכן".
אטימות הגזעית הצידה, התנגדות מהותית יותר כדי הכרזה היא שזה לא מאוד
מצחיק.
סאטירה מוצלחת מושך תשומת לב להיבטים של הפרסונה של פוליטיקאי כי הם
recognisably שם: ג 'ורג'
בוש-כמו-בוקרים היה חיבור הודה ידי תומכי מתנגדיו, גם אם הם לא הסכימו
על ההשלכות. הקשרים בין אובמה לבין ג 'וקר הם הרבה יותר קהה - הנשיא
בנימה נמדדת בקושי עושה אותו מועמד ברור עבור סוכן של כאוס. בכל מקרה את
האופי של
כריזמה אנרכיסט הוא די בעימות עם מטען של סמכותיות האח הגדול ברמות פוסטר
ב
אובמה. האם צריך לקבל תמונה כל המתיחה המשיך, ואז, זה יהיה כמו הלוקוס
בוטה של demonisation.
לעת עתה, אם כי, נראה כי יותר אמריקנים לראות המנהיג שלהם כמו בחור טוב.
edward przydzial
Sep 6, 2009, 6:10:53 PM9/6/09
to edward przydzial internet group
==================================================================================================
por Mark Milian
2 de septiembre 09
Flickr fue a buscar como el malo cuando se elimina una imagen del
presidente Obama retratado como el
Joker de "The Dark Knight". Los espectadores Flickr acusado de tener
una "agenda política" y ser "un matón".
En su mayoría, Flickr se ha pegado a una réplica a lo largo de las
líneas de: Lo siento chicos, pero esa es la manera en que la
obras de la ley.
Sin embargo, la propiedad de Yahoo para compartir fotos del sitio
desde entonces ha retrocedido, al menos en un aspecto. Flickr revisó
su
la política de desmontaje de martes a ser más claro cuando algo se ha
eliminado como resultado de un derecho de autor -
demanda por infracción.
Uno de 38 millones de usuarios del sitio propuesto en los foros de
ayuda que en lugar de eliminar completamente el
página en cuestión como lo había estado haciendo, Flickr debería
eliminar sólo la imagen, dejando los comentarios y otros
la información pertinente, como cuando la imagen de ofender subido y
el número de muestras que había recibido.
Eso es lo que Flickr dice que está haciendo ahora. A partir del martes
a las 3:30 pm, las solicitudes presentadas en virtud de desmontaje
la Digital Millennium Copyright Act o DMCA, dará lugar a la imagen que
está siendo reemplazada por una que
dice: "Esta imagen se ha suprimido debido a una demanda por infracción
de derechos de autor."
El equipo legal de Yahoo, de forma rutinaria pone las imágenes de
copia de seguridad después de recibir una demanda de reconvención por
completo de la
cartel original - "completo", lo que significa que tiene todas las
casillas y parece legítima. Firas
"Obama's Alkhateeb Joker" imagen no ha sido reintegrado, pero eso es
porque no ha presentado una DMCA
reconvención.
Un problema potencial con este proceso es que fácilmente podría
convertirse en un Merry-Go-Round de llenar
formas a fin de tener imágenes de alguien no le gusta quitar sin
ninguna pretensión real de los derechos de autor.
"Puede el amor y el odio de la DMCA", dijo Heather Champ, directora de
Flickr de la comunidad. "No es
perfecta ", pero" es una especie de proceso que se ha llegado hasta
nosotros desde el gobierno ".
Estas normas se aplican a otros sitios también. YouTube, que es
propiedad de Google, ha desarrollado una tecnología de
ContentID llamado para ayudar en la identificación de los titulares de
derechos reales, que es muy utilizada por ...
... la música, la televisión y el cine industrias. Pero incluso de
Google deben cumplir con las normas establecidas por la DMCA, es
decir,
después de recibir una denuncia, está obligado a retirar el vídeo en
cuestión.
La progresión natural, aunque, en última instancia debe trotar a las
dos partes disputas en la corte para resolver la
controversia. Es por eso que Alkhateeb está mirando para conseguir un
abogado antes de presentar una demanda de reconvención.
La parte más extraña de la "controversia Obama Joker" es que la
demanda por infracción de derechos de autor no se hubiese presentado
por
La revista Time, cuya tapa había sido destrozada, o DC Comics, cuyo
carácter, sin saberlo, había sido retratado,
o el fotógrafo original, Platon.
En cambio, fue Edward Przydzial, un fotógrafo independiente en el sur
de California, que al parecer había
presentó la solicitud de desmontaje con Flickr.
Przydzial mes pasado en contacto con el diario Los Angeles Times,
furioso que los tiempos habían acreditado Alkhateeb con el
la creación de la "Obama Joker" foto, alegando que él había creado la
imagen. Przydzial dijo que tenía un
"sello de tiempo los derechos de autor", como prueba de que él era el
artista de la imagen no sólo del original, sino también de la
con subtítulos con el "socialismo" y de otro que muestra a Obama como
un zombi - todos ellos basados en la revista Time
cubrir. (Przydzial no podía ofrecer versiones de alta resolución de
las imágenes que habíamos solicitado.)
Su testimonio fue un puesto de LiveJournal de fecha 9 de octubre. La
entrada muestra una fecha casi tres meses antes de la
Subir Alkhateeb Flickr, pero como cualquier blogger sabe, un sello de
tiempo se puede cambiar con el clic de un
botón.
Esta pepita probablemente críticos no tranquila como fundador de
TechCrunch Michael Arrington, quien escribió,
"Yahoo / Flickr debería haber pedido a sus abogados, si la reclamación
del derecho de autor había alguna validez antes de
la eliminación de la imagen. "Thomas Hawk, director ejecutivo de una
foto que compiten sitio de intercambio llamado Zooomr,
se preguntó si la eliminación complemento de Flickr se debe a "la
absoluta incompetencia".
Pero para el usuario de Flickr y muchos sitios con contenido generado,
no se requieren pruebas para su eliminación. Como es el
la naturaleza de la DMCA, Yahoo se afirma en la buena fe, una portavoz
de Yahoo dijo. Al firmar un formulario de DMCA,
refuerza a la persona que estás diciendo la verdad, bajo pena de
perjurio.
La lección es que si simplemente no le gusta una foto en Flickr, puede
rellenar un formulario que han tomado
abajo. Pero podría ser sólo un jurado de fuera de la seriedad
lamentando esa decisión.
- Mark Milian
Siga mi comentario sobre la tecnología y los medios de comunicación
social en Twitter @ mmilian.
Imagen: "Obama Joker" en la página Firas Alkhateeb Flickr antes de que
se quitó
Edwardprzydzial.com derechos de autor de la imagen 09
==========================================================================
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages