Slashdot Mirror
$5M In Torrented Files Presented As Art
ideonexus snips thus from Wired: "The Art 404 gallery is currently exhibiting a piece by Manuel Palou called '5 Million Dollars, 1 Terabyte' which is a 'sculpture' consisting of a 1 TB external hard drive containing $5,000,000 worth of illegally downloaded files. The hard drive is displayed on a pedestal at the gallery."
Adds ideonexus: "There is a PDF of the files stored on the device with links to the torrents." I'd like this to be an exhibit at every trial in which gigantic money damages are claimed for copyright infringement.
as found art?
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
I don't know which is stupider, the concept of the art project, or that they are distributing a list of links over the internet with a PDF file.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
At current RIAA prices isn't that just two MP3s?
Sig is on vacation
First, so the harddrive does not contain files, it contains one file with links to torrent files?
No, the hard-drive contains the actual files in question, the PDF is a separate listing of what files have been downloaded to the drive, and their value IIRC (I can't access the PDF file without my browser crashing as I'm at work and this computer only has Adobe Reader).
Second, THAT'S ART?!
Moreso than most things passing as art these days.
This exhibit actually aims to raise a valid point about piracy.
By highlighting how trivial it is to cause $5million of "damage" (by certain definitions of that word) and how little effect it actually has, it's supposed to get people questioning the way we deal with infringers.
I'll say it again (for the thousandth time - and this is entirely subjective but it's still true): THIS ISN'T FUCKING ART!!! What it is, however, is a coherent political statement that actually says something (unlike the proverbial paint thrown on the wall, feces on a Ritz cracker, etc, etc). Imagine that...
I guess the MSRP value of what the software/digital media is being sold for at the time of creation? i.e. ebooks, songs, DVDs, blu-rays, etc.
So since the RIAA/MPAA/BSA like to ask for $150000 per infringement, I guess the lawsuit will be in the billions. That's one man certain to be a starving artist for the rest of his life....
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
404 Art.... The file size is 40.4 KB in size.
Co-incidence? I think not!
Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
I know a lot of you are going to protest and complain that this isn't art, much like the protest over that sculpture made of raw meat... but in a sense this really is art because of the people downloading, the controversy over copyright, the flagrant copyright violation involved in the artist downloading these files and presenting them as an artistic work. I think it's commendable, and it definitely involves taking a risk and it does make you feel something, so it's art.
I didn't say it was good art, but it is art, and I think it's interesting.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
I'd like this to be an exhibit at every trial in which gigantic money damages are claimed for copyright infringement.
Why? What relation does the exhibit have to a civil regarding copyrights? Or do you think wasting the judge's time will work in favor of the defense?
I've seen crime scene photos displayed in a gallery as art. Do you think those should be exhibits at the trial? (Obviously the crime scene photos are evidence. I mean, the particular fact that the photos could be displayed as art, is that relevant to the trial?)
"See judge, the blood splatter is art. Therefor this killing was not a crime!"
Unless you're going the other way, and saying, if anyone should have to pay big money for copyright infringement, it should be the pretentious arsehole who tries to pass off a commodity hard drive as art.
In that, I'm with you 100%.
First, so the harddrive does not contain files, it contains one file with links to torrent files?
Second, THAT'S ART?!
It provoked an emotional response in you and it caused you to talk about it with other people. I'd say that classifies it as art. Maybe not GOOD art, but art nonetheless.
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
Every time you borrow my air, you are stealing from me. Please stop.
“Your mother” is a large installation that turns food into feces [sic.]...
FTFY
which is totally what she said
Apparently, anything can be called art now.
That tiny little box sitting on a pedestal is apparently worth $5,000,000. It think it's a poignant statement on copyright.
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
Interesting system, it's just like conjuring money out of thin air. In the olde daze a pirate was someone who had to work for his money, kill, rape, plunder. Now all he has to do is copy a file. Not even steal it, just make a copy
Avast ye swabbies!
Then I looked at the pdf. I can see that he chose which files he'd download very carefully. This isn't $5M of effortless movie and music grabbing. The first section of the list is several software tools that have outrageous license prices, like AutoCAD. Crown jewel of the collection: eight years of fiction books, $3M. It is literally an order of magnitude larger than the next largest thing on the list. This work shows how kinds of knowledge and culture that we don't spend a bunch of money and time arguing about in court have been affected by our banged up ideas about IP rights.
This is a work of art.
RIAA claims a 5.000.000USD tax reduction because of donations to an arts project.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Is this supposed to tell me if I'm an art critic or a lesbian, Mr. Decker?
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Well, if that's the definition of art, I just created an art masterpiece in my bathroom. I named the piece "Where's the plunger?" It's a kind of performance art, actually.
Sure. But that's not a new idea.
Exactly: We could take another hard drive and copy the first one over to it, then BAM! we've got ourselves 10M bucks. Then another and it's 15M. If we do a couple hundreds, we could actually end world poverty!!
The concept as I understand it is that the fact that just producing a copy of a disk can instatly create 5M dollars worth of anything is incredibly wrong. From there you can start deconstructing the whole business interpretation of copyright.
"Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett