Suicide Girls: It would be "fucking awesome" if appropriation artist Richard Prince sues us


#1

[Read the post]


#2

There was an interesting AMA on Reddit just the other day about this. https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/37hzrn/i_am_missy_suicide_founder_of_suicidegirls_artist/


#3

Is Appropriation art the first time its done. After that is copyright? How does that work?

This totally made me not like some modern “Fine Art”, when I first saw John Baldessari, I knew original art was hard but really!


#4

I had a friend who used to model, and was approached multiple times by SG reps due to her modeling work with a local guy who photographed gothy women (“Visually Odd Photography”).

The stories I heard about various agencies and photogs were pretty nuts. What a crazy industry.

SG in particular apparently was structured a bit like a pyramid scheme, where to become a SG, you had to refer 5 friends who did a photo shoot with them first. I don’t recall whether you had to pay out of pocket for those shoots.

That aside, I have a good deal of respect for the variety that SG brings to modeling.


#5

It would be great if this entire thing turned out to be just a scheme to get people to pay $90 for printouts of SG Instagram shots.


#6

Hilarious. Rock on, Missy.


#7

That would be fucking awesome…

…if they got a speedy trial by jury. But he wouild porobably get a bastard lawyer who could keep Suicide Girls running in circles until legal fees devour the website. This is American justice.


#8

Am I the only one who see that isn’t even a cat!?!!?


#9

I have no idea what you’re talking about.


#10

Wait, is the cat lady exploited or empowered? Is she 1000 times more so by Richard Prince, or 1/1000th?


#11

C’est ci pas un chat.


#12

Interesting take on the whole kerfuffle from an acquaintance of mine, who is very much not a fan of Prince:


#13

I still don’t see how this asshat isn’t being sued into oblivion by the copyright owners. What he’s doing is almost nothing but blatant copying - it’s so little changed that it has to be considered either a direct copy or a derivative work, both of which are prohibited. I’d love to see him take a Hollywood movie, do his usual level of “changes”, and start selling DVDs.


#14

The people he’s ‘appropriating’ Seem to have very few resources. Meanwhile he’s part of a fine art community that’s mostly become another leg of the financial/investment world. They can’t afford to go after him, and he can almost certainly afford to stall them out if they did.


#15

Somehow I don’t think he’s going to sue. He’ll just happily continue to take $90,000 where others get just $90.


#16

I seem to recall stories about SG being a fairly exploitative workplace (who would’ve thought!) and Missy Suicide basically being a shop window for the arsehole who ran the place.

And hey, the AMA linked above has unanswered queries about that as the top-voted comment. Heh.


#17

why not just do the same thing with his photos? surely he has a website. folks all around the world could take screen grabs and run their own exhibition. personally, i’d price the work at around $1.10 just to help saturate the market.


#18

You mean to say that someone on the internet is pretending to be a cat?
Frankly, the very idea is just preposterous.


#19

You should read the first comment of her Reddit AMA. It’s about her company exploiting women and photographers. She doesn’t answer. Her attempt to get some publicity worked very well, but not how she had hoped.


#20

Good artists challenge. Great artists provoke.