Image: Jacquelyn Martin for The New York Times
Daniel A. Moore, a sports artist for more than 25 years, used to get sideline passes from Alabama, but now he is not welcome on game day.
via NYTimes:
Sports Artist Sued for Mix of Crimson and Tide
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: November 12, 2006
[...]
[Daniel] Moore's paintings, reproduced in prints and on merchandise,
violated the university’s trademark rights, the suit said. It asked a
federal judge to forbid him to, among other things, use the
university's "famous crimson and white color scheme."
Athletes,
sports leagues and universities around the nation have become
increasingly aggressive in protecting what they say is their
intellectual property, and their claims have met with a mixed response
from judges and fans. But almost no one here thinks the suit against
Mr. Moore is a good idea.
"This lawsuit is the equivalent of the
Catholic Church suing Michelangelo for painting the Sistine Chapel,"
said Keith Dunnavant, an Alabama alumnus and the author of "Coach: The
Life of Paul 'Bear' Bryant."
A university spokeswoman, Cathy
Andreen, declined repeated requests for interviews with university
officials and lawyers, on what she said was the advice of counsel.
James Glen Stovall, who taught journalism at the university for 25 years, said only one sort of person would support the suit.
"I
can see why, if you're sitting in a roomful of lawyers, you might come
to that conclusion," Mr. Stovall said. “But no one outside of that room
would say: 'Hey, that’s a good idea. Let’s sue Daniel Moore.'"[...]
via Pierre Tristam/Candide's Notebooks, November 12, 2006 :
Intellectual Poverty
Art, Expression and the Parody of Property
Daniel A. Moore is one of those schlock artists, like Thomas Kinkade
and whoever does those velvet Jesus and Elvis interpretations or the
singing bass. In other words, he's wildly popular: Moore's "art,"
which looks like photographs (he calls it "photofuturism," or "five
parts realism to one part motion," not to mention six part oxymoron)
draws its popularity exclusively from its subject:
the University of Alabama ’s football team. Football in Alabama is not
next to godliness and backwardness; it is first in that hollow trinity.
The Alabama "Crimson Tide," as
the university's athletic herd is called, is a religious franchise to
which millions in the state and beyond pray, whirl and (in good
tail-gate tradition) hurl over. So when it comes to University of
Alabama fanaticism, what could be more prosaic than Daniel Moore's art?
The answer: The University of Alabama's lawsuit against Daniel Moore.
“Mr. Moore's paintings, reproduced in prints and on merchandise,
violated the university's trademark rights, the suit said. It asked a
federal judge to forbid him to, among other things, use the
university’s "famous crimson and white color scheme," the Times reports. "Athletes, sports leagues and universities around the nation have
become increasingly aggressive in protecting what they say is their
intellectual property, and their claims have met with a mixed response
from judges and fans."
Only "mixed" response? Why not
disbelief? Why not outrage? Daniel Moore's art may be schlock. It may
be unoriginal. It may be downright stupid in its appeal to and
immortalization of deadening and dullard moments on the gridiron. But
a) no one should have the audacity to suggest that it isn't art; that's a decision left up to its consumers (leaving it to the "consumption" to indicate whether it is or it isn't art);
b) Moore's work is obviously massively beloved, which goes a long way
to excuse its aesthetic Kinkadeness and goes an even longer way to shut
critics, including this vulgarly condescending diatribe, the hell up
(for the record: I would never be so kind to Kinkade, who forfeits all
indulgence by pretending that his work is in any way distinctive from
soft porn). but, and most importantly, c) no one, especially a behemoth
business like the University of Alabama, should have the right to
impede Moore's work either from being conducted (he's no longer allowed
at football games, even though for twenty years he had a sideline pass)
or disseminated in any shape and on whatever mugs [...]
Trevor Paglen's work doesn't just use technology to explore the world, it works to explore the very machinery of corruption and violence. In the past, he has used telescopes, cameras, hidden recording devices, the internet, print publications, and other media to expose the truths glossed-over by the secretive US military. For the last few years, he's documented secret military bases, throughout the country, and theorized about the neocolonial effect of these 'black sites' on the landscape. More recently. he co-authored a book on the CIA's 'torture taxis,' airplanes chartered to circumvent human rights laws by carrying out tortuous interrogations of bogusly-imprisoned subjects, in air. His collaboration with the Institute for Applied Autonomy collective has led to artistic visualization of otherwise dire data sets. This and other information, including a rare collection of cryptic, boastful clothing patches collected and worn by those enlisted to work on secret military bases, will be on view at an upcoming exhibition at New York's Bellwether gallery, November 16-December 23.
