ooh, weird - but isn't the story ABOUT your pic?i don't really understand. that article credits everything and everyone, lots and lots.
the MoS is shite, though.
edit: aaah, now i get it, after your explanation tweak. :) i'd forgotten the chronology of how that image came to be making huge sums of cash for someone that wasn't you.
(the MoS is shite, though.
edit: aaah, now i get it, after your explanation tweak. :) i'd forgotten the chronology of how that image came to be making huge sums of cash for someone that wasn't you.
grey kid is breakdancing to save a community centre,
Fri 11 Apr 2008, 14:16,
archived)
the story is about a screenprint of my 'shopproduced in different colours on a glitter canvas.
I have logs which show Associated coming to my site from a search and downloading the high resolution version of the image on which the print is based. No permission was asked.
And the credit for the superimposing is mistakenly given to Russell, not me.
I think the story also ran on thisislondon btw.
However, most of it seems lifted from The Sunday Times which ran a half page on it the previous week -They used the correct images of the prints on display, gave proper credits after spending sometime interviewing Russell, me and others.
(I have logs which show Associated coming to my site from a search and downloading the high resolution version of the image on which the print is based. No permission was asked.
And the credit for the superimposing is mistakenly given to Russell, not me.
I think the story also ran on thisislondon btw.
However, most of it seems lifted from The Sunday Times which ran a half page on it the previous week -They used the correct images of the prints on display, gave proper credits after spending sometime interviewing Russell, me and others.
beaubodor blogless,
Fri 11 Apr 2008, 14:22,
archived)