Interesting.

I noticed there is graffiti at the unused pit, some kind of art protest, at N 40th and Stone Way N, where the Safeway used to be.

I'm all for shooting too - in the interest of the proletariat (that being the multitude of people who should see art who for whatever reason are missing the show if they even know about it in the first place), photo bans are ridiculous.

Better to have a bunch of crappy photos of the art out there than none at all.

now if you want to see great art, you'd be better off going to SAM this weekend where you can see the art for free if you present your Library Card. They have three good exhibits on right now.

Did you know that even if you purchase a piece of art, you do not have the right to make copies of it, say by taking a picture and distributing the picture? The artist holds the copyright, and it does not transfer to you without a separate agreement. Just FYI. I know it's sort of stupid, but if you take pics at a gallery and distribute them, you could face legal penalties from the artist or galllery. It's complex and I don't get all of it, but I think it depends on whether and how much money you make from the photos, and in what way they lessen the money making potential of the original. But you don't have the RIGHT to make copies, is all I'm saying.

@4 - I remember, back in my game and magazine days, I paid for both repro and usage rights to some art works. Some was on a per instance usage basis, and some was on a game-and-media basis, but the copyright was retained by the artist even by purchasing those rights (allowing the artist to reuse the image for personal sale and for gallery print usage, so long as it wasn't used for a book jacket cover image or for a game image (internal or external).

Its protocol to ask to take pictures of the art out of courtesy when its on private property - in a gallery or whatever - and the gallery has a right to refuse but its kind of silly.

@4 you can take pictures of any art as long as its for personal use and I would consider a blog personal use. If you try to sell or profit in any way, then you should buy one-time use rights to publish.

The hard part is trying to figure out if a blog is making any money on its content and to what degree is their "fair use" of images starting to impose on the owner. I bet eventually this is going to be true of all kinds of "re-posting" rights possibly. What a nightmare. I'm surprised its still so vague.

Does Slog pay for content? Advertisers on the right as much as on the regular site or in the paper. Think about how it might affect posts in general. Pretty interesting.