A friend sent the article to me as an example of “artist overreach.”  Not that the friend is in favor of the NRA, but in favor of fair use.  Kind of the same theory as “everyone gets free speech even if it’s hateful."

My question is, if musicians can try to stop political candidates from using their music without permission in such a way as to imply that the musician endorses the candidate (https://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/stop-using-my-song-34-artists-who-fought-politicians-over-their-music-20150708) then why can’t visual artists stop the use of their images in similar contexts? 

Julia Muney Moore
Director of Public Art

Arts Council of Indianapolis
924 N. Pennsylvania St.
Indianapolis, IN  46204
o (317) 631-3301 x240
m (317) 332-8382
e jmoore@indyarts.org





On Jun 27, 2018, at 2:25 PM, Jennifer Easton <JEaston@BART.gov> wrote:

Did people see this very interesting article in Hyperallergenic? I would recommend reading the comments as well. The notion of Fair Use and public art is an interesting one - while most PA program agreements typically specify retaining a range of fair uses for commissioned projects, it was eye opening to me see this NRA video even being defined as fair use. 

Cheers,


Jennifer A. Easton
Art Program Manager
BART


510.874.7328
300 Lakeside Dr, 22nd Fl
Oakland, CA 94612