October 26, 2001
MEMO TO: ALL AIPAD
MEMBERS
FROM: AIPAD BOARD
OF DIRECTORS
RE: ARTICLES ON
WEBSITES
Dear AIPAD Members:
It has come to our
attention that some AIPAD members may
not be aware of the ramifications of posting
articles on their websites. Therefore,
in regard to articles, reviews, or other
intellectual property posted on members
[sic] websites, the Board of AIPAD recommends
that members receive prior permission
from the author and pay a usage fee to
the author if such is required.
That's all (s)he
wrote.
In its terse economy
of language, this advisory fails to inform
AIPAD members that the strictures of copyright
law extend to all such usages of copyrighted
material. That means not only its reproduction
on websites but its republication in any
electronic form (e.g., transmission via
email or inclusion on CD-ROMs). It also
means that the reprinting of it without
express permission in hard-copy form --
in books and magazines, as photocopies
made available at galleries or sent out
to accompany press releases or promotional/sales
kits on galleries and the artists they
represent -- is illegal. Furthermore,
while brief snippets from a published
text may be allowable as a matter of common
practice ("I loved it -- go see it!"
-- Rex Reed), substantial quotations excerpted
from copyrighted texts for inclusion in
press releases, gallery brochures, and
the like breach the copyright law if published
without the copyright holder's consent.
Even the inclusion of such extracts in
exhibition wall texts may be prohibited
without appropriate authorization. The
"fair use" exception to the
copyright law does not apply to commercial
usages -- and the merchandising activities
of a commercial gallery, by definition,
constitute commercial usages.
In short, any commercial
gallery's usage of any copyrighted material
by writers on photography almost undoubtedly
requires written permission. It seems
safe to say, on that basis, that every
AIPAD member has violated the copyright
law over the years, most of them repeatedly
-- though none (at least to my knowledge)
as egregiously as the defendant in the
present lawsuit. Perhaps this helps to
explain AIPAD's institutional response
to the present case, the organization's
refusal to take any public position on
this issue, and the silence of its members
on this subject.
-- A. D. C.
February 16, 2003
