Period 6 -- Critical Analysis #17

4/5/2018

For today's critical analysis, you will read an article about photographer Vivian Maier's work and the controversy surrounding who holds the copyright to reproduce, exhibit, and profit from her work. You will then respond to the article here. Here is the link to the New York Times article:
www.nytimes.com/2014/09/06/arts/design/a-legal-battle-over-vivian-maiers-work.html
Write a 4 paragraph response to the article above, giving your opinion on what you feel should happen to Vivian Maier's photographs. Consider these questions as you write:

Do you think that her work should be shown to the public after her death, even if she might not have wanted it shown when she was alive? Do the artist's wishes matter after the artist has died?
Who do you think should hold the rights to reproduce and exhibit Maier's work? Do you agree that John Maloof, who produced the documentary Finding Vivian Maier and is credited with "discovering" Maier's photographs, should hold the federal copyright? Or do you think that the copyright and resulting financial compensation from print sales should go to the heir produced by the lawyer named David C. Deal?

Be sure to post your response as a comment to the correct class period blog post. Your analyses will be graded on the following criteria:

meeting minimum length requirements
depth of organization
evaluation of the content
grammar/punctuation

If you do not finish in class, you must complete this for homework before class on Friday, 4/6/18!

If you are interested in reading more about the Vivian Maier case, here is a recent article about the settlement of Maier's estate: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-vivian-maier-estate-court-settlement-met-20160510-story.html

Parker Brown

4/5/2018 12:29:02 pm

I do think that Vivian Maier’s works should be displayed to the public even though she had died. She was a great artist, so she deserves the publicity for her great works. I think she didn’t tell anyone about the photos because she didn’t want to bring any attention to herself. Now that she is gone she won’t have to deal with the fame, so I think she would want them displayed now. It wouldn’t feel right if so many great photographs were just locked away, never to be seen.

It kind of frustrates me that she didn’t want to show all of her work. If someone hadn’t have found the photos, her life would have been a giant waste of time. Personally I feel that it is ok for us to show her work because now she is gone, and she doesn’t have a say in it. Also how does anyone even know if she didn’t want her work shown if she never communicated with anyone. I believe that because she was never clear on if she wanted them to be shown or not, they should be shown because they are great photos.

I think John Maloof should be the one to hold the rights for the works of Vivian Maier's. Without him there would be no works to even talk about. It is because of him that her works can come into the spotlight to get the fame that they have deserved. John Maloof has even made a documentary on her to expose her works even more, which helps show that he truly cares about Vivian and her works. John Maloof has put in a lot of time and effort towards her works, so it is only fair that he gets the rights.

Although David C. Deal did find an heir to Vivian, I still don’t think that he or the heir should get the rights to the photo. The heir basically didn’t even know that Vivian was alive until the photos popped up. The heir also hasn’t put any time and dedication to finding out who Vivian was. The heir just wants the money. John Maloof has put a ton of work towards the whole thing, and I think that he isn’t in it just for the money.

Annie Mosis

4/5/2018 12:29:30 pm

I do believe that Vivian Maier's talented work should be shown to the public after her death. Even if she kept her work to herself while she lived and may have not wanted to show people her work, I believe her work should be shown to an audience due to her well taken photos. Even though she is not living today, people should be able to see the photos she took around Chicago. Even if we did know her wish to keep her art secret, we do not truly know if that's what she truly wished. In my opinion, her images should be shown due to not knowing of Vivians true intentions with her images.

I believe that since she did not specifically say anything about what to do with the images when she dies that whoever now owns them has the rights to the image. If Vivian would have said something about them and what to do with them when she died then they should have obeyed her wishes and not been published. But since she did not say anything about the dealing of her negatives I believe John Maloof, the owner of the negative, has custody over the negatives and can choose to do whatever he wants with them.

I think John Maloof was in the right in publishing her images. I also believe that John should have rights to the images due to Johns commitment to researching Vivian. John went through many troubles and went out of his way to discover many things about Vivian. John also bought and discovered Vivians pieces so I think due to Johns knowledge of Vivian and the original finder of the images rights should go to John.

Though maybe legally Vivians relatives do have rights to her images, I believe John actually deserves the rights of the negative. When John purchased the storage locker he bought everything inside the storage locker that is including the negatives by Vivian. John purchased the images making the images his, not Vivians relatives. If the relatives want Vivians images they can buy them back but its Vivian's decision whether or not to let them buy them back.

Payton Down

4/5/2018 12:30:31 pm

I think that Vivian Maier took her pictures to express herself and keep the memories for herself. Although she didn't want to share the photos with anyone maybe she thought she would be judged and ridiculed for trying to express herself as a nanny. Of course in some sense does the feelings of the photographer had but there is no way to guarantee that no one will show them after her death. Especially when all of the work she did was amazing.

The wishes of a person who has passed is hard to ignore but we don't know why Vivian didn't share her photos to begin with. The reasons could be endless and she could have wanted to express herself of the social norm didn't let her. Her art work is inspiring people and making them feel different emotions with every photograph which is a true photographer. She kept a simple lifestyle and she was comfortable doing what she loved on the side, but there is no telling on what she would of wanted knowing about her death and the exposure of her photos.

I think the work of Maier’s was kept for a long time stored away and the man who found them, John Maloof, took them in and did what he thought was the right thing to do not knowing about the things Vivian wanted. Maloof cares a lot for the photos and Vivian and wants her reputation or name to keep living on. He creates documents and found all the photos himself. If it wasn't for him maybe the person who would of bought them wouldn't of known what to do. Of course there should be someone with blood to connect to Vivian to get some of the shares but Maloof has put so much work into making this right for Vivian.

I think the money should not go to a lawyer but the heir not only because that's the only thing that is a connection to the heir to Vivian but because it wouldn't be right if a lawyer took all of the hard work and dedication and make it to just another deal. Vivian would probably want her heirs to have enough money to live off of and do something great with their lives. Vivian took great photos and kept them to herself which means she didn't even consider the money that it would bring her. She just wanted a personal connection and express herself through the photos.

Elizabeth Wray

4/5/2018 12:30:52 pm

When Vivian Maier died, her work had not been showed to the public. After her death, her work was discovered by John Maloof. In my opinion, John Maloof should be credited with her work, after all, first come first serve. Maloof found the photographs and bought the negatives, so he should be credited by them. In my offense, Her first cousin should not get the photographs because he did not even know Maier. Although Maloof didn't either, he is the one who originally found the negatives.

There are arguments that whether or not her work should be shown to the public, and in my opinion, they should not. Maier did not want her work shown and I think that we should respect her opinion even though she passed. Just because someone dies, does not mean that there opinions suddenly don’t matter. Even though someone died. That does not mean that they suddenly dont matter and they are forgotten. The photographs are very famous, but so is the photographer.

Maloof did a lot of research on Maier in order to make that documentary. He should be credited with her work and the documentary. Maloof should be responsible for her photographs. He worked extremely hard to make a documentary about Maier, so clearly he thinks very highly of her. Maloof should hold the federal copyright to all her images for so many reasons. Baille, Maier’s cousin, had no idea that he was even related to her. He knows nothing about her or her works.

Baille should NOT get the copyright for many reasons as well. Baille did not know Maier and although neither did Maloof, Maloof knows and appreciates her works. Maloof knows alot about art and the difficulty of photography. Baille doesn't at all, and Baille is so proud that he is related to such a famous artist that he never even knew.

Matthew Weiss

4/5/2018 12:33:07 pm

The article discusses who should hold the rights to the works of Vivian Maier. In the end, I believe that John Maloof should hold the rights to her work, despite Vivian having relatives. John Maloof had put so much into researching Vivian Maier, and discovering who she was, that it doesn’t make sense that a distant family member should be given the profits of John Maloof’s discovery of Vivian Maier’s work.

Going through all of the research that he did, and all of the questioning that he did, John Maloof should be the one to benefit from it. When John Maloof first discovered Vivian Maier’s work, it was his time, his effort, and his money that began everything for the publicity that Vivian Maier’s work has today. A distant family member shouldn’t take the profits from John Maloof just because they seek financial compensation. As said in the article, John Maloof spent 10 years of his life promoting, and working on everything from Vivian Maier, and a distant family member shouldn’t be able to come into the situation seeking only financial gain.

In regards to whether or not her work should be given publicity after the death of the artist, this should be a decision made by the current owner of the work, and while this decision should be impacted by whether or not the artist wanted the publicity for their work. So if Vivian was set on her work to never be public, while it would be wrong for the owner to show it and give it publicity, it is still in the owners right to do so.

Finally, I think that John Maloof made the correct decision to make her work public. On the surface, it seems that she wanted to keep her work hidden, those of the people being interviewed in the documentary, suggest that it was less about keeping the work secretive, and more about avoiding attention and the spotlight. John Maloof acknowledges the fact that the works of Vivian Maier deserve attention, and recognition, and from the start of his efforts to bring her works to light, it was about giving her the recognition that she deserved.

Brandon Collins

4/5/2018 12:33:24 pm

Her work should be shown to the public after her death. In a way its to recognize her talents and to respect. She kept it secret because she seemed to not want the attention but she also wanted to show people her work. Technically her wishes do matter but she didn't write a will saying not to show her photos. In Vivian Maier’s case her wishes don't matter because they don’t exist.
Vivian Maier's family is all just as mysterious as her. There cut off from any connections with each other and finding legal documents to show their I.D. is near impossible. After Vivian's death her cousins come into the picture saying that they should own the copyright. The cousins of Vivian took the discoverer John Maloof to court to gain the copyright.
John Maloof was working on a book of the history of Chicago when he stumbled upon an action that was selling negatives, later on he finds out that a mysterious artist name Vivian Meyer made these photos. He saw how good the negatives where and decided to try to find all of the others. John Maloof printed a few and put them up on display for people to see. He did not comprehend how many people would actually show up. Later on he made the documentary called “Finding Vivian Maier” where he tries to find out more about the life of Vivian Maier.
The right to reproduce and exhibit should go to John Maloof. He should hold the federal copyright because he discovered the negatives and went out of his way to find the others, he also went out of his way to print them and show them to the public. Her will stated that she doesn't want any part of her belongings to got to her family. Now her cousins come in to claim Vivian's work, this situation looks a lot like the siblings are there for money while John Maloof is trying to preserve an artists work.

Jordan Bell

4/5/2018 12:34:12 pm

Vivian Maier would have wanted her work to be shown after death. Maier took over 100,000 photos, at that high of a number it would have been crazy if she had not wanted at least one of those photos to be seen. Everybody who encountered her said that she was very private, mysterious and strange person. The main reason why I believe that Vivian Maier wanted her work to be seen was because she had reached out to a printing store in France and asked the owner to print her work onto postcards.
I think that the wishes of an artists do matter, especially after they have died. If the artists wishes are not respected then the artist is not being respected and in a way their work would be used against them. People have great talents and it is their choice whether or not to share them. If somebody disregards an artists wishes and shows their work when the artist had said not to, anybody who moves to show the work should be considered selfish.
John Maloof should hold the rights to reproduce and exhibits Maier’s work because he discovered her photographs. Just because someone is related to you does not mean that they should get your inheritance. In the New York Times article, it says that Maiers only living relative is Mr. Baille. Mr. Baille is a first cousin once removed, Mr. Deal argues, should hold the federal copyright to Vivian Maier’s work. However, Mr. Baille said that before he was called about the issue, he didn’t know that Maier had died or that they were related or that she existed.
It would be more reasonable for John Maloof to hold the federal copyright for her work. He truly values her work and her. In the documentary, Maloof had said that a goal of was was to make Vivian Maier’s photographs famous. Maloof and bought her work for a school project and never used it. He could have thrown it all away or kept her work to himself and she never would have been discovered. Maloof knew that her photos were good and he decided to share them with as many people as he possibly could.

boyd meltzer

4/5/2018 12:35:40 pm

This article is written about the legal battle concerning the previously unknown street photographer Vivian Maier. A lawsuit was filed by a lawyer and former commercial photographer named David C. Deal. He is suing John Maloof, who bought her negatives and is now selling them and exhibiting them for profit. He aims to give the rights to the photos to a man named Francis Baille, a distant relative who is one of the only surviving relatives of Maier.

I believe that works such as Maier’s deserve to be displayed for people to enjoy. Despite the fact that the original artist wanted to keep her work secluded, that goal was achieved during Maier’s lifetime. Now, after her death, I think that her work should be exhibited in order for people to appreciate her and her work. I think the efforts of the people trying to push out and publicize her art should be respected.

I believe that the lawsuit’s efforts to conceal Maier’s work and give it to an heir is not the right thing to happen. It seems that John Maloof is passionate about photography and Maier’s work. Baille, on the other hand, had no idea he was Maier’s relative and most likely is not passionate about photography and exhibition of photography. Therefore, I believe that only people who are truly interested in her work and putting it under the public eye should handle her work.

Therefore, I believe that the original discoverer of Maier’s work should be in possession of the federal copyright as long as he continues to contribute to the public’s ability to view and enjoy her art. If the family member that Deal sought to grant the rights to was close, such as a son or daughter, then it would be much more understandable. However, the relative that is in question didn’t even know Maier existed until the lawsuit.

Claire Williams

4/5/2018 12:35:55 pm

Although Vivian Maier died before her work could be shown to the world, I think it is still very important to showcase this great photography. Some people argue that she did not want it to be shown. Of course I think that an artist’s wishes matter after they pass. However, we have no written note from her specifically saying that she didn’t want her work out there. Maybe she was just scared or didn’t have the right platform to put it out as her work.

The truth of the matter is that we honestly just don’t know why she kept all of this to herself. However, I think it is our job as the people who came after her to make her legacy live on. They are really interesting photographs and I personally like her work a lot. I am glad that they decided to start showing her work. The world should be able to experience them.

Typically, I would say that the family member should be the one who holds the rights to her work. But in this case, it was so hard to track down someone with just a minimal relation to her. The person they found who is related to her does not seem very interested, and is not even very close to her. I don’t think that this whole important legacy should be left to this person who is barely related to her. Therefore, I think that the man who bought her work in the storage place should continue to have the rights over the photography. If he was a horrible man who just wanted to sell her work for his own profit, that would be bad. But this man has invested his life to put her work on display to everyone and to make the documentary so that everyone can know her story.

If they don’t leave her work with John Maloof, I think that it should be made into something else to protect her legacy. Maybe they could use all of the money the work makes to donate. They could also make a permanent museum dedicated to her work in Chicago that has it all on display. The large amounts of money collected for her work could go to keeping the museum up and running, to protect her legacy.

Kylie Bruehler

4/5/2018 08:13:32 pm

Vivian Maier had never explicitly stated if she wanted for her art to be seen by anyone. During the time that she was alive, Vivian Maier never showed her photography to anyone and kept her gift of photography a complete secret. There is no doubt that Vivian had a gift and this can be seen through her many incredible photographs, and this is why her choice to keep quiet about her art comes as such a surprise. The main point of an artist creating art is for it to be displayed or viewed, yet Vivian Maier wanted to be a secret.

Art that is as extraordinary as Vivian Maier’s should be shared with others and should not be kept away. Though this is true that beautiful artwork should be brought into the light, Vivian’s wishes should also be respected. As Vivian did keep her artwork exclusively to herself, she also did not ever talk about her work or where she wanted it to go if anywhere at all. It is hard to tell exactly what Vivian Maier would have wanted for her art. Though Vivian never said anything to this herself, her art should be viewed but only in a respectful manner in an attempt to follow her wishes whatever they may have been.

I do agree that John Maloof is credited with discovering Vivian Maier’s work, as he did bring up her artwork and her mystery, making her photography seen and he was always respectful of her work, but I do not believe that he should hold the federal copyright. Though Maloof can be highly respected or credited with the responsibility of finding Vivian’s work and taking the time to carefully study her, the copyright will always truly belong to the artist, Vivian Maier, whether she be dead or alive. The question of who will receive the federal copyright is a very tough question to answer though. This also brings up who will hold the money made off of Maier’s work.

The only heir partially connected to Vivian Maier had never even met her when he was informed of the fame of her work. This to me makes it seem that if one of these people is going to be credited over the other, John Maloof truly deserves the copyright and money over the heir who does not have any connection to Vivian’s art. It is extremely hard to decide who will receive all of the credit that Vivian should have be credited with herself while she was alive, but the man who discovered her and studied herself and her work clearly showed a deep enough interest in her work to be credited with something. John Maloof shares the greatest connection to Vivian’s work and her life, and if anyone should be credited with uncovering her gift for photography it should be him.

Lucas Prado

4/6/2018 10:53:42 am

Since some of the photos have already been shown to the public, I think that it would only be fair to the public that they get to see the rest of the photos. If John trademarked the photos, then would be possible that he gives the rest of the photos to galleries. However, if the lawyer won, it would be possible to have the photos given to the relative to keep. If they were given to the closest relative, I would think that they wouldn’t be shown. Either way they would most likely be shown to the public in some aspect either way, but it's possible that the world would only get a little taste of her photos.

I do think that Vivian’s wishes should be best followed. Since they were her photos, it makes sense that her will should be followed. Thus, if it says in her will that she wanted to leave her photos to her family, then it should be given to her closest family member. Even if it says this, however, I think that John shouldn’t have to pay any reparition or copyright infringement charges to the first cousin, once removed. Also, if the mention of the photos was omitted from her will or if she never wrote one, then they should be released to the public.

I think that, given the success of the art shows featuring her work, the photos should have no copyright and be released to the general public. Vivian never intended for her photos to be noticed by anyone, and so I think that any profit made from showing her work is a kind of extortion. I feel this way because the photos belonged to Vivian, and since she never intended to show the photos, profiting from showing them feels as though it is a kind of stealing. Even though they just wanted to share her photos with the world, it was still her photos that they profit off of. If the photos were public domain, there wouldn’t be this legal battle whatsoever.

As I said earlier, the rights to the photos should not really belong to anyone to begin with, since they were Vivian’s photos. If it said in her will that her photos should go to her family, then the photos would be the rightful property of her cousin, once removed. If there was no will or she didn’t mention the photos, then the dilemma lies with the legal battle. Yet since the relative had no direct relation or real knowledge of her existence, it feels as though they are simply giving him the photos. However, John also does not really have the rights to the photos, since they had private intent. Ideally, no one owns the photos.

Natalia Orquin

4/6/2018 10:56:12 am

I believe that Miss Maier wanted her work to be noticed and admired. However, she herself not be in the spotlight. After watching the documentary, I realized that she was someone who didn’t want to be noticed. She always changed her name, never really gave anyone too much detail about her life, and hid away the photographs during her lifetime. She was a nanny for numerous kids throughout her life yet she gave out details about herself.
I believe she wanted her artwork to be displayed because if not she wouldn’t have saved all of it in the trunks. She wanted the art to be shown, but I think she herself was scared of being in the spotlight. She knew she was good photography it was just a matter of her not wanting to t be in the spotlight.

Regardless of what happened when she was alive i still believe her wishes should be respected after death. However, it’s not like anything matter after you are gone. The artist’s intentions of reproducing her artwork is unclear, but I think we can all guess that anyone would like their work to be shared with the world. Since she had no family nor anyone to leave anything behind to the artist who found the photographs should have the rights because it took time and effort to reproduce the images.

Yes, John Maloof should hold the accredited rights from the federal copyrights because he discovered her and all her work. It took time and effort to create the documentary, print the images from neg to pos, and someone has to take the money if not then who would. The heir produced should not go to the lawyer David C. Deal because he did nothing to help the artist photography rise in fame.

gilly

4/16/2018 09:00:27 am

After Vivian Meyer’s death her work was discovered. I believe Vivian Maier’s work should be shown to the public because she was a great photographer and had a way with people and capturing life in her images , that many viewers of her work found interesting. She is passed away so it's a shame to not let people see the beauty she was able to capture.

Vivian is not alive anymore so she will not have to deal with the pressure of people or the criticism she might have received if she was still alive. Her images should be good to share with people , because it gives you a peek into the past and into children's lives.

I think John Maloof should have the rights to her images. He did discover the first few and then collected the rest. Since he has over 90% of them he should be able to share them. If it wasn't for John those images would be lost or thrown away for no one to ever see.

He also made her become a famous artist and dedicated his time and money to singley recover each film so that it could be shown to the world. When he put these images out there he wasn't thinking about getting money he was just thinking that Vivians work was good. He felt the world deserved to see this. So overall I think John should have all rights to her images.

Comments are closed.

Period 6 -- Critical Analysis #17

Analyze

Archives

Categories

Home