Disqus - Latest Comments for LJ

Re: $150 Million:

LJ — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 17:08:57 -0000

Shepard Fairey's contributions to the Obama campaign should be examined. People should ask if it is acceptable for Obama to accept his donation and if they are legit in the first place. Obama has officially praised Fairey for his illegal activity on the streets.Street art costs this country over 10 billion per year to clean up. So why does Obama support it? Fairey has also been arrested dozens of times for his illegal activity. Why is it that Obama will drop donations from Rezko but accepts over $400,000 in donations from Shepard Fairey selling his Obama prints? Keep in mind that Shepard Fairey has made a history of using violent visual rhetoric against the US people and government in order to create his so called revolutionary career. Since Joe the Plumber was examined for any little mistake why don't we examine Shepard the Artist for tax dodging or any other problems. It is easy to discovery that he is a copyright infringer. Why does Obama support this artist so strongly? Does Obama care about the rights of artists? His actions certainly say that he does not. McCain and conservative bloggers need to pick up on the Obama / Fairey connection NOW! This story needs to be exposed.

Re: mediabistro.com: AgencySpy

LJ — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:49:33 -0000

Hate to break it to you, but I don't think everything is honest in Saatchiville. Saatchi’s site, www.saatchi-gallery.co.uk, including STUART looks fishy to me. There traffic ranking is very deceptive. Go to www.alexa.com and you will see that the largest group on the site based on country is India making up 16.5%. Most art sites and websites in general have the United States, United Kingdom and Germany as their three top countries for traffic. Saatchi has India, Thailand and Indonesia which all happen to have a market for pay-per-click services.

So my guess is that the marketing brains behind Saatchi’s art site has paid some of those companies to visit the site in order to fudge their numbers. Need more proof about Saatchi’s little white lie? The United States and United Kingdom each make up less than 0.6% of the membership. Germany makes up 1.1%. Russia only makes up 1.2%. So that means most of the hubs of the international art world are hardly represented on the site. Anyone else think that is strange? When compared to other popular art sites?

People have said it before and I will say it again, the only reason people put work on Saatchi’s site is because his name is on it. His site looks like it came from the mid 1990s. You tell me how a poorly designed site with an outdated look has become one of the top 300 websites in the world. Don’t bother. I know the answer. Millions of hands paid to visit and Saatchi’s huge bank account to pay them.

Re: Orphan Works: Write Your Representative

LJ — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:15:55 -0000

You might want to check this out. Brian Sherwin from the Myartspace Blog interviewed Alex Curtis from Public Knowledge about the Orphan Works bill. If you read it closely you will see that Alex contradicts himself several times.

http://www.myartspace.com/blog/2008/08/art-spac...

Re: Art Theft Scandals Rock deviantArt

LJ — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:32:14 -0000

I seem to be having trouble posting this. DeviantART has always slacked on protection. That is why I use Myartspace now. For one, the galleries on myartspace are flash, which is hard for crawlers to take images from. You can view individual images by right clicking on them and clicking on view, but people are not able to then right click on the image itself in order to save it. I know people can still work around that if they want the image bad enough, but in my opinion it is a lot safer than deviantART or Redbubble. I think you can have traditional html galleries on Myartspace also if you have a Premium account, but I prefer free accounts so I don't know how that works exactly. I know a lot of people knock flash galleries, but they are safer and are becoming widely used by pro artists. Nothing is 100% protected from theft online, but I'd say Myartspace is one of the safer websites for artists.

Re: Art Theft Scandals Rock deviantArt

LJ — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:39:47 -0000

I'm not so sure that deviantART is protected. The difference between youtube and deviantart is that deviantart openly states that a large base of their membership is people who create fan art. Even Angelo Sotira, the CEO of deviantART, has stated several times in interviews that the deviantART community is largely fan based. So there is a conflict in that deviantART openly states that it primarily a fan artist site but also offer e-commerce. THAT is what could land them in the fire if ever a victim comes forward after finding out that a fan artist is selling knockoffs of his or her art. Now there is legally room for parody and derivative works but I've seen art on deviantART that is nothing more than an exact depiction of a copyrighted work of art. I'ver personally reported violations and have never had a response from deviantART. If they have removed the offending art it would be nice if they would inform people that report it.

Re: Art Theft Scandals Rock deviantArt

LJ — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:43:23 -0000

Also, I realize that fan art can be found on every art site like deviantART. However, deviantART is the only art site I can think of that openly states that they accept fan art and that their community is primarily for fan art. Again, that is what might land them in a legal battle since they also offer e-commerce.

Re: Orphan Works Bills Introduced

LJ — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 03:07:42 -0000

Do you think Obama is for the Orphan Works bill? I read a post about Shepard Fairey that hinted at the possibility. I put the link in the website space if you want to take a look. Shepard has violated current copyright law and Obama must have been aware of that when making him the official artist for his camp.

Re: Orphan Works Bills Introduced

LJ — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 01:41:45 -0000

I have to say that copyright infringers like Shepard Fairey will glow if this bill is passed. The man already steals from political artists who are no known widely in the US. If this bill passes he could steal from anyone and not have to worry about paying much if anything in royalties. I wish more people again the orphan works bill would have the courage to speak out again artists like Shepard Fairey and even Damien Hirst in order to make it clear that we will not support artists who violate the copyright of fellow artists or other individuals. I just don't understand it. If a kid on Facebook alters the work of someone else the kid will be given the third degree by other artists but if a popular artist does the same it is acceptable. You can't say that you stand against the orphan works bill while allowing these popular artists to walk all over everything we believe in.

Re: A Requiem For Cease & Desist

LJ — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 01:50:40 -0000

It fails because people will not combine efforts to make a stand. For example, I commented about Shepard Fairey on your blog just a few minutes ago. His art is currently on the cover of Time magazine yet he is a known copyright infringer. It is not popular to mention that about him but it is true. Look up the shirt titled "Cuban Rider" that he was selling as a shirt in 2007. It turned out to be the work of a Cuban artist named Rene Mederos. Shepard Fairey settled out of court with the Mederos family. The problem is that hardly any media source mentions that fact about Shepard Fairey. I think that if more people went after this thief it would send a clear message to other copyright infringers. Instead we all complain about a kid on Facebook or Myspace who steals an image or article.

Re: A Requiem For Cease & Desist

LJ — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 01:52:39 -0000

Furthermore, when asked about copyright infringment in interviews Shepard Fairey will either mention that he has given money to charity as if he should not be questioned or he will say that if a "bust" happens he hopes it is a "good bust" as in the victim being OK with him making a profit off of their work.

Re: Artists Express Concern Over PhotoBucket

LJ — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 01:57:07 -0000

Wait, so www.deviantart.comis connected with Photobucket. So anything an artist puts on there will be on Photobucket as well. It is nice that deviantart has watermark options but do they let users know that their works can end up being printed on Photobucket? What if you want to sell prints on deviantart would'nt the watermark get in the way? Anyone know?

Re: Orphan Works: Write Your Representative

LJ — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 01:56:34 -0000

I wish Obama would make a stand against this legislation. Artists have been asking for him to make his opinion known for a couple of years now. I actually have a great concern that Obama will support it instead of knocking it down if it is passed. Mainly because Obama has not shown much respect for copyright and artist rights in general. I say that because of the support he has given to Shepard Fairey who has infringed the copyright of fellow artists at least five times that I know of. Surely someone with the internet savvy that Obama has would be aware of those violations and other allegations concerning Shepard and copyright issues. Not a popular position to have, but I think it is one worth looking into. Could the champion of art and culture end up taking our rights away?

Re: Amy Sol’s process

LJ — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:52:01 -0000

Amy Sol is one of the hottest emerging artists on the market. I first learned about her after reading an interview she did for the Myartspace Blog at www.myartspace.com/interviews. She is probably still on that list if you want to check it out. They also have interviews with Sas Christian and other artists that are considered underground or pop surrealists.

Re: New orphan works bills introduced

LJ — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:20:26 -0000

You might want to check this out. Brian Sherwin from the Myartspace Blog interviewed Alex Curtis from Public Knowledge about the Orphan Works bill.

http://www.myartspace.com/blog/2008/08/art-spac...

Re: 2007/06/14/deviantart-funded/

LJ — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:59:34 -0000

deviantART is no longer what it once was. It has become a site that embraces qauntity over quality. That is why I support sites like www.myartspace.com that are serious about creating a great site for artists instead of just another buggy site worth millions.

Re: 2007/06/14/deviantart-funded/

LJ — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:06:42 -0000

I had my account deleted for posting a link to this story and comments. Deviantart will allow an underage girl to have nude shots up for months, but delete me within hours of posting a link to this?

Re: 2006/08/21/amateurillustrator-takes-on-deviantart/

LJ — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:24:05 -0000

deviantart has been called a site for the 'artworld', but if you attend openings in Chelsea (and if you don't know what I'm talking about you don't know anything about the 'artworld') and mention www.deviantart.com you will most likely get laughed at. The artworld, as in big time art collectors, curators, and artists who have been featured in ARTnews don't want anything to do with deviantart. You won't find them on there. So how can deviantart be called an art site for the 'artworld'?

As for deviantarts membership. You can't delete your account on that site. They even state that in the rules. So even though your work is off the site the account is still there and still counted as part of total site membership. Even banned profiles remain in that way. This means that the numbers are not exactly honest.

Re: 2008/02/13/deviantart-collections/

LJ — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:30:27 -0000

"7 million registered users"

Again I must point out that these numbers are not exactly honest because members can't delete their accounts. When you delete it simply removes the artwork and text, but the bare profile and user name is still there. My guess is that www.deviantart.com does that so that they can keep high membership when making ad deals with companies. For all we know there could be millions of dead accounts on there. The bloggers should be asking why deviantart does not allow accounts to be wiped out completely when a member deletes. This is one of those issues that you don't dare mention on deviantart forums or chat rooms without the risk of being banned. Why is that?

Re: 2007/07/18/artbreak/

LJ — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:37:42 -0000

The more I read blog reviews about art sites the more I think that certain sites pay for positive reviews or at least the mention of their name. I have to agree with Kelly, let the people decide. deviantART has a lot of positive reviews for a site that is often buggy, has had really bad press as far as their founders are concerned (anyone remember JARK?), and for a site that is hammered often by troll communities. Where are the reviews for sites like www.artwanted.com? www.nobullart.com? and www.myartspace.com? And why is that every art site that is reviewed other than www.deviantart.com often end up with a negative review compared to that flawed giant? It is like these guys knock the little guys down before they have a chance. Which leads me to think that pockets are getting fatter.

Re: 2007/07/18/redbubble/

LJ — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:47:56 -0000

I like www.redbubble.com, www.artwanted.com, and www.myartspace.com. Sites like that are great. Especially if you link from one to the other. Then place all those links on www.deviantart.com, www.youtube.com, and www.myspace.com and you will have mad traffic at all angles.

Re: 2007/07/18/artbreak/

LJ — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:10:00 -0000

Not to be confused with Zack, the guy who runs www.artbreak.com. Personally, I don't like Artbreak. Why? First, they have been known to rip off the design of other art sites in a shoddy way. Second, Zack (the guy who runs Artbreak, not myself) has booted people off the Artbreak forums if he thinks they are there to invite Artbreak members to other art sites yet Artbreak DOES harvest emails. Zack has openly said that harvesting emails is not ethical so why does he do it? How do I know they do it? Because I was sent an invite from Artbreak a few days ago to an email that I only have on one site and that site just happens to be another art site. I know that this sort of thing goes on all the time but I think it is very lame that Zack talks about being ethical only to do the very things he speaks out against.

Re: 2007/07/18/artbreak/

LJ — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:12:45 -0000

I'll add that Artbreak is not a "breath of much needed fresh air" because I checked out www.myartspace.com mentioned above and it seems to me that www.artbreak.com ripped some of their design. I like art sites to be original and to have an edge. Shoddy cookie-cut versions of other art sites are just lame no matter how cheap the sell fees are.

Re: 2007/07/18/artbreak/

LJ — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:47:52 -0000

It gets even better...

"The Artbreak service makes it possible to post images hosted on Artbreak to outside websites. This use is accepted. However, pages on other websites which display images hosted on Artbreak must provide a link back to Artbreak from each photo to its photo page on Artbreak."

So if I post my images on Artbreak and then post the image elsewhere I'm supposed to link back to Artbreak? Sorry Artbreak, but my images are MY images. Not your images!

"your Artbreak account (including feedback) and User ID may not be transferred or sold to another party. If you are registering as a business entity, you personally guarantee that you have the authority to bind the entity to this Agreement."

So if my login name on Artbreak is 'Zackharvestsemailsfromotherartsites' I can't use the same login name on another art site (or any site for that matter) from that point on? OR if I have a business name and use it as my Artbreak User ID I can no longer use it elsewhere? What are you trying to pull Artbreak?

Honestly, this is the most fishy site I've ever been on or seen. They don't even have a way to handle disputes if a buyers fails to pay, yet they are more than happy to take their payment if the buyer does pay. Maybe I'm being harsh but when a site nabs my email it had better expect a few reviews from me. Based on my searches of Artbreak it seems I'm not the only one annoyed.

Re: 2007/07/18/redbubble/

LJ — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 08:58:03 -0000

www.redbubble is a lot better than www.artwanted.com even though Artwanted just had a facelift in site design. Myartspace is good, but they don't have their stores open yet. I think once they do they will be a hit. They obviously have the cash flow to create a good site because they just launced a free to enter scholarship competition with over $16,000 in prize money. Not bad. www.deviantart.com is always going to be the head of the serpent as far as being the most popular artsite. Mostly because it is very tough to delete your account on there. They swip your account, but your user name and page remain even though it has no content. Deceptive, but it has worked for them. When are you guys going to write about Myartspace or Artwanted?

Re: 2008/06/04/artlog/

LJ — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 11:06:20 -0000

I think MYARTSPACE ( http://www.myartspace.com )will blow most of these sites out of the water once they implement their shops. They have better design than Artnet and they make Saatchi's site look like a fossil.

Re: 2007/07/18/redbubble/

LJ — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 11:16:35 -0000

www.redbubble.com is just a rip-off of www.artwanted.com. Very strange that Artwanted has not had much press considering they are over 9 years old. Also, it is no secret that they had trouble with people from Redbubble harvesting AW members. I honestly think people have to pay for press because if no someone would have wrote about AW by now.

Re: 2008/04/17/deviantart/

LJ — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 03:03:34 -0000

Hi Angelo. â€œIn 2000, there was no place for artists to put their artwork online.â€ That is what you said in an interview with Redefine Magazine. What a lie! www.artwanted.com was already around. A few art communities were. I like deviantART but you often re-rewites history in order to make yourself or the site look better. So if you can try to change the history of art sites online how do we know if your position on who founded what is true?

Re: 2006/08/21/amateurillustrator-takes-on-deviantart/

LJ — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 03:08:57 -0000

â€œIn 2000, there was no place for artists to put their artwork online.â€ = Angelo Sotira from his interview with Redefine Magazine. What a lie! www.artwanted.com was already around. A few art communities were. I like deviantART but Sotiro often re-rewites history in order to make him or the site look better. The site mentioned here has just as much chance as any of them. The problem with deviantART is that their staff make bold claims and their membership numbers are deceptive. There has to be over a million dead accounts on there if not more. You can't 100% delete accounts.

Re: Tweetable Art: 10 Twitter Tips for Artists

LJ — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:52:49 -0000

Is this the "acclaimed" artist from Youtube? The one who has had numerous exhibits but fails to mention where any of them took place? When is Mashable going to do their homework about art? This woman is not even a dot on the art world radar. Thousands of Youtube views does not make one a valid artist. Why not ask Paddy Johnson or someone of that caliber to write about art tech? Has Natasha ever stepped foot in a Chelsea gallery?

Re: Tweetable Art: 10 Twitter Tips for Artists

LJ — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 22:24:57 -0000

I think his point is that we have a novice giving advice on how to be successful selling art online or anywhere else for that matter. You may not want to accept it but their is a great deal of business wrapped up in art today and the traditional art market is very much a part of that. You could compare this to a pawnshop owner giving advice about the stock market. Pestering art dealers online will only lead to many doors being shut. The art dealers on Twitter are there to push their own artists and not to be hounded by hopefuls. It makes me wonder if this author has exhibited anywhere but coffee shops.

Re: Tweetable Art: 10 Twitter Tips for Artists

LJ — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 22:29:42 -0000

Not to be mean, but 27 is not young in the art world. At least not today. You have people in their early 20s selling for $10,000 and up to $75,000 in New York. By early 30s they are often just a memory. That is how the game goes. I think mid-career artists will make a come back though. The galleries don't want to gamble on fresh grads these days.

Re: Cool Stuff: The Audacity of Joke T-Shirt

LJ — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 23:50:50 -0000

What a great move by this artist. It would be protected as parody from all three angles. The Joker is a cultural icon as is Obama and Shepard Fairey's HOPE poster. Though Shepard has stated that he is going to sue artists like this woman. Shepard is the real joke if you ask me. He is a copyright infringing fool.

Re: Why Liberals Hate Me!

LJ — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 01:07:31 -0000

I know for a fact that there are more conservatives from our generation out there than what most people think. I also know that we don't always fit the stereotypes of what a conservative should be. I'm an art student at SFAI and I lost many friends when I mentioned my conservative views. But I also made some new friends because of those views. Far lefters are abound in the art world even in the schools. But I was glad to find out that critic and artist Brian Sherwin is conservative AND Christian. At least that is what it said on his Facebook profile if it is actually him. Regardless, know that inspired me to be more open about the conservative views at school. How open minded is that? He is conservative but he interviews liberal artist all the time and remains fair and balanced no matter who he interviews. That is rare today since most of the art writers I know of take absolute positions toward the left side of the political spectrum. You should definately look him up. His blog is at www.myartspace.com/blog and you should be able to find his Facebook easy if you do a search for his name.

Re: Why Liberals Hate Me!

LJ — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 01:35:42 -0000

OhHolyKnight, you do know that during the Civil War the North and Northern attitudes were some of the first seeds that grew into modern day conservatism? You also know that the Republican party pushed the blunt of civil rights through congress and that it was mainly Democrat politicians who opposed black students in the same classroom as white students? You do know that it was Republican politicians who sent troops in to make sure that black students had that right? You also know that Democrats have thrown the US into more major wars than the Republicans? You do know that Democrats are to blame for the blunt of the taxes we have today including the establishment of the IRS because they sold out to bankers? You do know that Democrats support huge government and that Republicans support minimal goverment? You do know that Democrats have created a new form of slavery by oppressing blacks through welfare and that black leaders like Frances Rice speak out against it but are never given the press that Sharpton or Jackson has? You do know that Democrats want the government to control how your money is saved and how your savings can be used by the government if needed? You do know that Democrats more than Republicans can be compared to socialist systems of government and you have observed how those governments end up controlling and killing their own people? You do know that Democrats have supported the KKK in the past by actions or lack of action they have made involving that hate group? You do know that under complete left control there would be no room for individuality or personal ambition? You do know that Democrats are against No Child Left Behind even though it has increase the reading and math ability of students in low economic areas including inner cities just so they can win the vote of teachers unions? You do know that Democrats try to sway the voting opinion of workers through union even though it is illegal to do so? I've worked in factories enough to know that they will send info to the union officers and tell them to hand it out and to be sure to say "I'm not trying to tell you how to vote but look at what the Democrats have done for workers". And what have the Democrats done for workers O Holy one? They have prevented workers from investing their savings as they see fit making it practically impossible to establish the small fortune they could have if Republican concepts were implemented. They are more apt to vote against measure that would increase the wages of workers througout the country. They have attacked corporations to the point that most are outsourcing to other countries which is why we are seeing an increase in jobless workers at this time. They want to push industry back 100 years by making tough restrictions that will protect our environment but will also make us as stable as a third world nation economically. They have blocked drilling of oil in the US that would save us from having to rely on hostile nations for oil. They are more apt to tell us what we can eat, how we should dress, and where we should go for services. If you like to be controlled and told how to live or if your life is even considered a life you are more than welcome to vote Democrat.

Re: Let’s get ready to rumble: The Obama and McCain debate is on!

LJ — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 03:22:17 -0000

I wish McCain's campaign would point out that the Obama campaign has Shepard Fairey, a known copyright violator and petty criminal, as Obama's official campaign artist. Obama can accept $400,000 raised from Shepard's Obama prints but he gave donations from another criminal, Rezko, away? What gives and why is the media not onto that!
Shepard Fairey has made a career off of creating art that depicts the White House burning and other situations that are not patriotic and that give rise to anger and frustration regardless if the artist claims otherwise. Shepard Fairey is a left wing wacko who supports violent radical groups and has referenced them througout his career. And Obama supports him? Obama actually sent Shepard Fairey an official letter praising his career and supporting the artists practice of placing Obama stickers all over city stop signs. I wonder how many people have died because of that?
Not to mention that street art clean up cost the nation over $15 billion per year! And Obama supports it? Street art can be cool but it cost tax payers a lot of money! But if you point out the Obama / Fairey connection people say you are closedminded. I think spending that money on education is more openminded. Sorry. But Obama supports artists who destroy our city streets? How can we have change with a candidate who supports civil violence in this manner?

Re: Obama Video: He slips … “My Muslim faith”

LJ — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:05:14 -0000

Who cares if he is a muslim or christian. His actions should be noted more than anything elese! So why does Obama support a thug like Shepard Fairey? The media latched on to the Joe the Plumber story. So why have they not explored Shepard the Artist? Shepard's print of Obama has made over $400,000 for Obama's campaign. So why did Obama refuse money from Rezko, but is more than willing to accept it from another criminal.
Just look at this. This is why Obama praised about Fairey in a personal letter to the artist that the artist has mentioned in interviews. Obama supports this activity. He actually told Fairey in a letter to keep putting street works on stop signs. Why? And why has the media not mentioned this.

obeygiant.com/headlines/full-coverage-part-1-dc#more-3231
Shepard Fairey has violated the copyright of several artists. He laughs about having been arrested over a dozen times for damaging property. Street art is trendy and cool, but it also cost tax payers over $15 billion per year. Some studies have show that street art nationwide has increased 35% in the last six months. So that is an increase in the cost to clean it up as well. And Obama supports that?

Not every artist supports Obama, look,
lgwilliams.com/obama/obama_poster_challenge2.html

Re: SHOCK: McCain supporter attacked and mutilated in Pittsburgh

LJ — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:10:01 -0000

Again, this story is nothing compared to a story about Obama that should be exposed. They attacked Joe the Plumber, but the media and the McCain campaign has not attacked Shepard the Artist. Shepard Fairey is the artist behind the HOPE poster of Obama. Obama has openly praised him and has openly supported his illegal activity on the streets. So why did Obama refuse funds from Rezko, but accepts over $400,000 from another criminal who takes part in crimes and damage to property that cost tax payers billions per year? Visit the link below. It is all there. Obama is NOT the Champion of Art and Culture. If he was he would not openly support an artist who does not acknowledge international copyright law.

lgwilliams.com/obama/obama_poster_challenge2.html

Re: SHOCK: McCain supporter attacked and mutilated in Pittsburgh

LJ — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:24:48 -0000

http://obeygiant.com/headlines/full-coverage-part-1-dc#more-3231

Um, this is not a lie. Obama has openly supported Shepard Fairey fool. According to Shepard Obama praised him in a letter for his street activity including covering stop signs with his propaganda. Maybe Shepard is the liar.

Regardless, the link above is straight from Shepard's website involving his illegal activity. So why is Obama accepting money for the sell of Shepard's merchandise including the HOPE poster? Does Obama support such activity?

Re: SHOCK: McCain supporter attacked and mutilated in Pittsburgh

LJ — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:35:14 -0000

And cleaning up graf and street art in general does cost billions per year Mr. Toe. See,
http://www.graffitihurts.org/learn_more/how_does_graffiti_hurt.cfm

So why is Obama supporting that? By having Shepard Fairey represent him visually he is supporting it. By having Shepard Fairey represent him visually he also supports actions again the rights of artists like copyright infrindgment. Shepard is a hack. He steals from other artists. If you want solid proof look up how he stole from the artist Rene Mederos. So if Obama is the Champion of Art and Culture why is he walking hand in hand with this so called artist who has been arrested dozens of times for damaging and defacing property? Isn't this fact more of an issue than Joe the Plumber or this hoax attack combined?

We demand that Obama stand for artists rights! We demand that he make his position on the orphan works bill known. We demand that he give back the $400,000 that he has accepted from Shepard Fairey's HOPE merchandise. We stress that Obama does not represent the creative community as the media has claimed.

http://lgwilliams.com/obama/obama_poster_challenge2.html

Re: SHOCK: McCain supporter attacked and mutilated in Pittsburgh

LJ — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:42:16 -0000

Toe, Shepard Fairey reads books. That is where he ripped the Rene Mederos image from in order to claim it as his own. After being exposed he stated in an interview that he new he was violating Rene's copyright, but did not know how to contact the artist directly. So why did he pass it off as his own?

See,
http://www.art-for-a-change.com/Obey/index.htm

The interview,
http://www.motherjones.com/interview/2008/03/interview-shepard-fairey.html

Notice that when questioned about his crimes and violations he quickly mentions the charity he has done. I guess Shepard can do anything as long as he donates money? I wish that Urbanconservative would expose this rat and Obama's connection with him. Obama is not the Champion of Art and Culture as long as he obtains funding from this copyright violator.

Re: SHOCK: McCain supporter attacked and mutilated in Pittsburgh

LJ — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:50:35 -0000

Titus, that is the problem with Obama. You can drop unethical names left and right and Obama supporters will say that it is trivial or that it does not represent who Obama is as a person. I believe there is something to be said about the company you keep. People say that about McCain because of his connection with Bush. So it is fair game to point out the people connected to Obama if you ask me.

I don't see McCain chilling with an artist who laughs about being arrested several times for damaging property. I don't see McCain associating with terrorists and extremist speakers. Obama does, but he short changes those connections. Kind of like how he stated that he never heard his former pastor say anything bad about America or the government, but did say exactly that in his book. Obama is a liar. McCain is as well. But something is wrong when Obama slips up on his religion and plays ignorant about the past of those he is involved with.

Obama's campaign poked fun at McCain for not using the internet that much. I think it is fair to say that Obama should know about Shepard Fairey and these other people simply by doing a search of their names on Google. In this new information age ignorance is not bliss. Ignorance is just ignorance or an all out lie.

Re: Barack Obama Endorses Communist Punk Che Guevara

LJ — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:55:48 -0000

Obama loves Che. That is one reason why he loved the image Shepard Fairey created of him which was a complete rip off from another artists image of Che. Obama' campaign told Shepard to use HOPE instead of PROGRESS out of fear that people would connect the image to socialism or communism. Another question is to ask why Obama supports illegal activity that cost tax payers billions per year.

Here is the truth
http://lgwilliams.com/obama/obama_poster_challenge2.html