Back to Metroland's Home Page!
 Site Search
   Search Metroland.Net
   View Classified Ads
   Place a Classified Ad
   Online Personals
   Place A Print Ad
 Columns & Opinions
   The Simple Life
   Looking Up
   Myth America
   Rapp On This
 News & Features
   What a Week
   Loose Ends
   This Week's Review
   The Dining Guide
 Cinema & Video
   Weekly Reviews
   The Movie Schedule
   Listen Here
   Art Murmur
   Night & Day
   Event Listings
 About Metroland
   Where We Are
   Who We Are
   What We Do
   Work For Us
   Place An Ad

Bong Hits for Jesus


No, Iím not gonna talk about the Supreme Courtís recent free-speech case. I just like saying ďbong hits for Jesus.Ē

Hey Bullwinkle! Hereís something we all might enjoy! The Intellectual Property Society of Albany Law School is hosting a panel discussion on fair use in copyright law on Tuesday, April 10 at 5 PM in the Dean Alexander Moot Court Room. The panelists will be: entertainment lawyer Owen Warshavsky from the NYC firm Troutman Sanders; Jennifer Pariser, the vice president of Business and Legal Affairs at Sony/BMG; Sheldon Halpern, the Honorable Harold R. Tyler Jr. Chair in Law and Technology at Albany Law School; and yours truly, the proprietor of the biggest law firm in Housatonic, Mass. If you donít already know, ďfair useĒ is the fuzzy legal doctrine that allows limited copying of otherís works for various purposes, and is a crucial factor for such things as appropriation art, parody, music sampling, education, and especially that whole Internet-remix culture thing that all the kids are talking about. I doubt that any of us four panelists are going to agree on much of anything, and the discussion is going to be lively and fun, to say the least. And if thatís not enough to get you out on a Tuesday, there will be a reception following the discussion. Thatís polite-talk for free beer. See you there.

I tend to not think about tax issues much, other than paying my own taxes when Iím supposed to, but thereís some tax legislation in Congress right now that deserves your support. Grassroots arts organizations often depend heavily on artist donations for their survivalóhow many times have you gone to a fund-raiser that features one of those silent auctions of donated artwork? Half of the stuff on my walls I got that way, usually for a ridiculous price so low that itís embarrassing or an insult to the artist or both. Itís often a rather sad situation where struggling artists donate their works to help support a shoestring organization doing Godís work; it shouldnít be that way, but there you go.

And to make it all the more ridiculous, the artist canít write off the value of the work as a charitable donation. Under current IRS rules, the artist can only write off the value of the raw materials in the work. The cost of the paint, canvas, clay, dried elephant dung, whateveróthatís the artistís tax write-off. And to go from the ridiculous to the sublime, if some collector first buys the painting instead and then donates it to the organization, the collector can write off the full fair market value of the work.

In my experience with a number of nonprofit organizations, collectors rarely donate their acquired works. Artists always donate. And they get screwed in the process.

Maybe not for long. There are bills before both the U.S. House and Senate that would provide artists with a tax deduction for the fair market value of their works when they donate them to educational and collecting not-for-profit groups. The bills have bi-partisan sponsors and could use a push to keep from getting lost in the legislative shuffle. Theyíre bills H.R. 1524 (House) and S. 548 (Senate). Write a letter.

John Perry Barlow was sure disappointing on Colbert the other night. It was like he needed a nap while Colbert was loaded for bear, as usual. Barlow was there to talk about the Electronic Frontier Foundationís lawsuit against Viacom for demanding and getting the removal of obvious parodies of Viacomís shows from YouTube, in particular a mash-up of Colbert that had posted (Viacom owns Comedy Central, which owns The Colbert Report). The lawsuit is a nice push-back to Viacomís ridiculous $1 billion suit against YouTube for ďallowingĒ Viacomís properties to be posted on the YouTube site. There were all sorts of points to be made, mud to be hurled, and Barlow barely threw a punch. Iíve seen Barlow speak a couple times and heís brilliant and funny and engaging, but some concepts just canít be made in a punch line, or as is always required on Colbert, a counter-punch line. The two guys were clearly operating on different speeds, and faster always wins.

My thoughts about the Viacom-YouTube suit are posted on my blog, and suffice it to say that Viacomís suit strikes me as largely a sham, and the fact that Viacom is on the short end of a second lawsuit for being a bully bears that out. And the MoveOn takedown isnít an isolated occurrenceóIíve got a nephew whose skillful South Park parody was knocked off YouTube by Viacom as well. Viacomís tactics amount to throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and no doubt thousands of perfectly legal works, works of parody and comment, have gotten the boot because of Viacomís overaggressive nonsense.

What this is all about is the doctrine of fair use. And youíre thinking, ďWhere have I heard of that before?Ē Go back to the first paragraph. Thatís where.

óPaul C. Rapp

Send A Letter to Our Editor
Back Home
Copyright © 2002 Lou Communications, Inc., 419 Madison Ave., Albany, NY 12210. All rights reserved.