Egyptian Prime Minister Essam Sharaf on Monday postponed the swearing-in of a new cabinet intended to deflect anger over the pace of reform. Sharaf, who heads a caretaker government after a revolt toppled strongman Hosni Mubarak in February, had hoped the sweeping reshuffle would persuade the protesters to end a 10-day-old sit-in at Cairo’s iconic Tahrir Square. But the protesters complained that the new cabinet retains ministers they wanted sacked, including Justice Minister Abdel Aziz al-Gindi, whom they accuse of delaying trials of former regime officials, including Mubarak. Mubarak, who was forced to resign as president after a nationwide revolt, was said by…
Continue reading …Could the Cindy Sherman of Monkeys Accidentally Revolutionize Copyright Law for Artists?
July 18, 2011 No Comment
By now you’ve probably heard of the “Cindy Sherman of the Monkey World,” as we dubbed her recently. While working in an Indonesian national park, British nature photographer David Slater had his camera purloined by a clever macaque monkey who took several self-portraits, apparently fascinated by her own reflection in the lens. The exceptionally charming images that resulted caught the eye of Britain’s Daily Mail and won the cheeky monkey fans around the world, as well as “calling into question notions of personae, monkeyhood, affect, and the history of photography itself,” as we put it. This photo of a clever monkey posing with photographer David Slater is at the center of a lively copyright dispute / Courtesy Caters News service in solidarity with Techdirt We were being tongue-in-cheek, but as it turns out the images have indeed called the very nature of photography into question. The pics are now at the center of a lively debate about copyright, with implications not just for Slater but for the entire world of animal art (yes, there is a world of animal art). After hearing about the accidental monkey masterpieces, the Web site Techdirt posted a short essay musing on the fact that several of the images bore a credit line attributing them to the U.K.-based Caters News Agency, for which Slater works. Copyright is generally held by the person who takes the picture, and since the author was in this case the monkey — Slater explicitly stated that he had no hand in creating the image — Techdirt wondered by what basis Caters could have acquired the copyright. Someone from the news agency promptly wrote to Techdirt to request that the images be removed from the site — without, however, addressing the fact that the original post had specifically challenged Caters’s legal right to own the monkey pics at all. “These images are being used without David’s or our permission, therefore can I ask you remove these images from your site immediately,” went the letter. Techdirt writer Michael Masnick replied in an email, asking what the legal rationale was for the request, and claiming “fair use” to boot. The macaque monkey took the photos herself, without the assistance of human hand / Courtesy Caters News service in solidarity with Techdirt Caters News Agency fired back: “Michael, regardless of the issue of who does and doesn’t own the copyright — it is 100% clear that the copyright owner is not yourself. You have blatantly ‘lifted’ these photographs from somewhere — I presume the Daily Mail online. On the presumption that you do not like to encourage copyright theft (regardless of who owns it) then please remove the photographs.” Techdirt adduced the testimony of a number of legal experts to show that Caters’s understanding of copyright here is shaky. More importantly, in a followup post, the Web site goes deeper into the intricacies of copyright law, concluding that it seems fairly clear on the fact that only humans get copyright, whether in Indonesia, the United Kingdom, or the United States. “In order to be entitled to copyright registration, a work must be the product of human authorship,” says a quote by the U.S. Copyright Office. “Works produced by mechanical processes or random selection without any contribution by a human author are not registrable.” All of this leads to big questions for the world of contemporary art, where works generated by “mechanical processes” and “random selection” are established parts of the vocabulary (see Cory Arcangel’s current show at the Whitney) — as are art projects that involve snapshots taken by a third party, for that matter (Nikki S. Lee). But never mind that, our question is: What does this mean for Cooper the Cat? The Seattle-based feline art phenomenon has built an empire — or really, his owners have built an empire — on his photographic snaps, made by a collar-mounted camera that automatically takes a picture every 10 minutes. Unframed photos by Cooper sell in $145 dollar range, and he even has a “Cat Cam” book of his work for sale. But now the very basis of his art practice may be called into question, all based on the actions of one goof of a monkey. Stay tuned. -Ben Davis, ARTINFO More of Today’s News from ARTINFO: See Highlights from Moscow’s New Sex Museum, Where Art, Politics, and Coitus Engage in an Unholy Threesome WikiLeaks’ Unrealized Project: What We Learned From Hans Ulrich Obrist’s Epic Interview With Julian Assange Bonjour, Monsieur De Chirico!: Paris Museum Secures the World’s Largest Bounty of the Surrealist’s Masterworks 5 Reasons Why Kanye West Might Actually Make It in Fashion Prolegomena to a Contemporary Theory of Judgment, or Why Some Art’s Cool Like what you see? Sign up for ARTINFO’s daily newsletter to get the latest on the market, emerging artists, auctions, galleries, museums, and more.
Continue reading …
ORLANDO, Fla. — This is what freedom looks like for Casey Anthony: $537.68 from her jail account, no job, estranged parents, a criminal record, lawsuits pending against her and the scorn of multitudes who think she got away with murder. She quickly gave reporters the slip after walking out of jail Sunday, but whatever life she manages to build for herself will be lived under a media microscope and the shadow of countless threats. Experts who have helped other notorious defendants through rough times say she will have opportunities as well, but it won’t be easy for the 25-year-old, who was found not guilty of killing her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee, but convicted of lying to investigators. With her hair in a bun, Casey Anthony walked out the front door of an Orlando-area jail shortly after midnight, wearing a pink T-shirt, blue jeans and sneakers, and escorted by sheriff’s deputies holding semi-automatic rifles. Protesters shouted “baby killer” and “you suck” as she climbed into an SUV. The vehicle sped away and darted into a parking garage at a building where one of her attorneys has offices. Where she went next is unknown. Soon after her release, there was police activity at Orlando Executive Airport as two vehicles pulled up to a twin-engine private jet bound for Columbus, Ohio, but no one saw Anthony get out and onto the plane. Ohio is the home state of Anthony’s parents, but an official at the Columbus airport said the aircraft was only carrying golfers back from a Florida vacation. “Casey is in good hands,” said Todd Macaluso, a former member of Anthony’s defense team who declined to comment further. Her lead attorney, Jose Baez, did not respond Sunday to email and phone messages left by The Associated Press, nor did other lawyers on her defense team and those representing her father and mother. Another former Anthony lawyer, Terry Lenamon, said he had no clue where she was headed, and that probably only a few people close to her knew. “I wouldn’t want anyone to know,” he said. “I think she needs to go underground and I think she needs to spend some time to get her life back together.” Anthony’s July 5 acquittal shocked and enraged many around the country who had been following the case since Caylee’s 2008 disappearance. Anger has spilled onto social media sites and elsewhere. Her legal team said on Friday it had received an emailed death threat with a manipulated photo showing their client with a bullet hole in her forehead. Anthony did not report her daughter’s disappearance for a month and was arrested after telling a string of lies about the case to police. Caylee’s remains were found in December 2008 near the home Casey Anthony shared with her parents. Prosecutors alleged that Anthony suffocated her daughter with duct tape because motherhood interfered with her desire for a carefree life, but her lawyers said the girl drowned in an accident that snowballed out of control. Some of the jurors who acquitted Anthony said they believe she bears some responsibility for her daughter’s death but that prosecutors failed to prove that she murdered the child. Anthony had remained in jail to finish a four-year sentence for lying to investigators. With credit for the nearly three years she’d spent in jail since August 2008 and good behavior, she had only days remaining when she was sentenced July 7. Her public vilification did not ease with her release from jail. “A baby killer was just set free!” Bree Thornton, 39, shouted as the SUV left the jail. “She is safer in jail than she is out here,” said Mike Quiroz, who drove from Miami to spend his 22nd birthday outside the jail. “She better watch her butt. She is known all over the world.” It won’t be impossible for Anthony to get a fresh start, though it will be difficult, said Los Angeles-based attorney Thomas Mesereau. His clients have included the late singer Michael Jackson when he was charged with child molestation and actor Robert Blake when he was charged with murdering his wife. Anthony could accept requests for paid interviews, or a benefactor may be able to help her in the short term, Mesereau said. “When you have that degree of celebrity, there is usually somebody who would like to get involved,” Mesereau said. “The problem is trusting anyone. People are willing to leak things to the media. They’re willing to be paid off for information. It’s very difficult to find people whom you can trust.” As of Sunday, though, those closest to her had revealed little about her future plans. Baez said in a brief statement only that he hoped Anthony could “receive the counseling and treatment she needs to move forward with the rest of her life.” Other attorneys on her defense team have not hinted at where she might go, and neither have her parents, whose relationship with Casey Anthony is strained. During trial, Anthony’s defense attorneys argued that her father, George Anthony, molested Casey as a child and covered up Caylee’s death. He has denied both claims, and neither has been substantiated. What is known is that Casey Anthony still faces a slew of legal problems even though the criminal charges have been resolved. She has been sued for hundreds of thousands of dollars by a Texas group that searched for Caylee in the weeks after she was reported missing, and prosecutors are seeking to recoup the cost of their investigation into Caylee’s disappearance. Anthony also is being sued for defamation by a woman named Zenaida Gonzalez who claims she has been harassed and unable to find work after Anthony said a baby sitter with her name kidnapped Caylee. Gonzalez’s attorneys had wanted to depose Anthony before she left jail, but the deposition was rescheduled for October. Any of those civil cases could put a major dent in any money Anthony receives for writing a book, signing a movie deal or doing interviews. Anthony is broke, and her defense team was paid for with taxpayers’ money after $200,000 she received from ABC News was spent. Several book publishers contacted by The Associated Press said they knew of no memoir that was being shopped around and consider her too tainted to sign a deal. Anthony could avoid the potential liability of hundreds of thousands of dollars from the lawsuits by filing for bankruptcy, though plaintiffs would probably attempt to keep her on the hook for damages if she signs lucrative deals after filing, said R. Scott Shuker, an Orlando bankruptcy attorney. “There is a potentially huge upside to keep the income and not owe the debt, but you know these folks are going to challenge it so she would be having more trials,” Shuker said. An important step in building a new life is getting psychological help to cope with her notoriety, severed family ties and newfound freedom, said attorneys with clients in similar circumstances. “Everything she has been through, that’s more than most people can deal with in a lifetime,” said Daniel Meachum, an Atlanta attorney who has represented football player Michael Vick when he was convicted of dog fighting and actor Wesley Snipes when he was convicted of tax evasion. Media relations expert Marti Mackenzie, who specialized in legal cases, said it’s important for Anthony to make some kind of public statement soon. She said a standard news conference is out of the question, but Anthony needs to say she made terrible mistakes, that she is grateful to her defense team and that she has thought about what happened every day of her life in jail. “In traditional public relations language, it’s called feeding the beast,” Mackenzie said. “Even if you don’t give the beast a full meal, you respond. Because once you’re part of media scrutiny … how it is handled once the case is over will help to set a tone.” ___ Associated Press writer Curt Anderson in Miami contributed to this report.
Continue reading …NBC’s Curry Touts Dalai Lama Giving ‘Comfort’ to Obama During ‘Fierce Struggle’ With GOP
July 18, 2011 No Comment
In an interview with the Dalai Lama aired on Monday's NBC Today, co-host Ann Curry bizarrely asked the Tibetan spiritual leader about the debt ceiling fight in Congress: “The President is in a fierce struggle with his political opponents over the future of the nation's finances. What is the best way, your best advice, in how to find compromise with those you deeply disagree with?” [ Audio available here ] The Dalai Lama responded by saying both sides “must work together” to come to a deal: “this is economic problem. It is not the interest of this party or that party. It's a national sort of interest.” Curry noted how, “The Dalai lama says he offered President Obama comfort,” during a weekend meeting at the White House.
Continue reading …
Vegans are going to be super-conflicted by this one. Researchers at Beijing University’s College of Life Science and Technology are pioneering a four-legged creature friendly method for cranking out the 300,000 tons of gelatin produced each year. Their solution: people . Well, not in the Soylent Green sense. No, the process in question here takes “human gelatin genes [and inserts them] into a strain of yeast [producing] gelatin with controllable features.” Sound appetizing? It might, if you want to avoid chowing down on “Mad Cow” tainted gummy worms at the cinema. Alright, so maybe these Chinese scientists are signaling the sensationalist red alert a bit prematurely — it’s just too bad Charlton Heston isn’t around to witness this bit of life science imitating his art. [Image credit via Film Critic ] Continue reading Human-derived gelatin spares the livestock, confuses vegans Human-derived gelatin spares the livestock, confuses vegans originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:26:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …Even mild brain injuries can significantly increase the chance of developing Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia, says the largest brain injury survey ever conducted, and the first to concentrate on veterans. The study examined more than 280,000 veterans over 55 years old who received care at Veteran Heath…
Continue reading …
A new survey shows one fifth of parents have taken an under-five to a festival. Is this a good idea? And if so, how do you make them sit through the Low Anthem? Try these tips … It was early Saturday afternoon at Larmer Tree Gardens, home of End of the Road festival. The Broken Family Band had taken to the stage and, as their opening chords rang out, my son – then five years old – flung himself to the ground at my feet. He clutched his hands to his ears and screamed: “No! No! No!” It’s not the kind of experience that leaves any remotely diligent parent thinking they’ve made the right choice about the weekend’s family entertainment. Nevertheless, according to a survey of 1,500 parents conducted for the baby and parenting website gurgle.com , a fifth of mums and dads have taken an under-five to a music festival in the past year. In the event, we had a decent time at End of the Road. My daughter – then nine – made a fortune collecting plastic glasses and claiming back the deposits. My son enjoyed the circus skills workshops and messing around in the woods. It was certainly a much happier experience than Latitude in 2007, when I had to threaten a drunk teen who was trying to push me and my son – three at that point – out of our spot at the front of stage for I’m from Barcelona . I can’t help but have mixed feelings about kids and festivals. On the one hand, every time I see one of those stories about someone giving birth at Glastonbury, the Daily Mail reader that lurks inside me insists the child should be taken into care immediately and the parents prosecuted. I feel only pity when I see photos of kids in buggies mired in several feet of mud. On the other, people I know and like, and on whom I have never called social services, take their kids to big festivals every year and the kids appear – at this stage – undamaged by the experience. It might be appropriate, though, to offer some guidance to those thinking about embarking on the family festival experience for the first time. 1. Smaller is better The bigger the crowd, the greater your paranoia about your kids disappearing. At End of the Road, it was possible for me to show my daughter where I was standing by the main stage and allow her to wander off, knowing where to find me. I wouldn’t try that at Reading. 2. Don’t expect to hear much music There’s a fighting chance your little ones will not want to listen to an hour of some bearded American with an acoustic guitar singing about death. They maywell find plenty to entertain them around a festival site, but it’s likely none of it will be musical. Ask yourself: do I really want to spend several hundred quid to hear no more than a couple of hours of music all weekend? Alternatively, go with another family so you can do babysitting shifts, enabling each set of parents to see some music unencumbered. 3. Don’t be too protective Your children will see and hear things you might prefer they didn’t. It can’t be avoided, so don’t sweat it. Equally, you’re in a large crowd of people and none of them – literally none – care about your parenting needs. So don’t set up a large picnic blanket with parasols and sunshades in front of the main stage so you can hear the music without your kids getting sunburnt. That is selfish and antisocial. 4. Nevertheless, some rules of parenting still apply Just because you’re at a festival, it’s not Lord of the Flies. It’s astonishing how many parents think they can let their kids turn feral the minute they’re on site. So, encourage your child not to take others’ food and drink, not to wreak carnage on other children who are playing their own games, not to treat the facilities as a giant adventure playground. 5. Go to a festival where you can go in and out easily You might find the kids’ facilities at the festival of your choice to be massively overburdened. It’s no fun for your kids to wait an hour for a five-minute go at making a fairy out of twigs and discarded gaffer tape. So it’s worth picking a festival that’s near other things, which you can easily drive to without facing an hour’s walk to your car and then enormous hassle trying to get back in. Our favourite thing at Latitude was spending Saturday morning on Southwold beach. We occupied the mornings at End of the Road by visiting Monkey World and going fossil hunting on the Jurassic shore. It made the kids much more amenable to the Low Anthem a couple of hours later. 6. Don’t be afraid to stay offsite Chances are you’re not going to be getting wildly intoxicated, so you’re likely to be able to drive away at the end of the evening. Rested kids are happy kids, and they might get a better night’s sleep in a local B&B than in a tent with some campers hosting an impromptu rave next door. This is not a fashionable view, I know. But it works for me. Pop and rock Festivals Children Michael Hann guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
UKFI – which controls taxpayers’ stakes in RBS and Lloyds – calls for further clarity over work of the independent commission on banking and other regulators Uncertainty about banking regulation is holding back government plans to sell shares in Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland, the body that controls the taxpayers’ stakes in the bailed-out banks warned on Monday. UK Financial Investments (UKFI), in its annual report , puts the taxpayer losses for the two banks at £13bn, but makes clear that it is ready to seize any opportunity to begin selling the shares. David Cooksey, chairman of UKFI, points to a number of regulatory uncertainties, notably the independent commission on banking (ICB). Chaired by Sir John Vickers, the commission has already indicated that he wants banks to “ringfence” their high street business from their riskier investment banking arm and hold more capital. “We believe it is important that the government is not seen to be a permanent investor in UK financial institutions. We therefore await further clarity emerging in relation to the work of the ICB and the other regulatory changes … before we will be able to recommend the start of the process of selling the government’s shareholdings,” Cooksey said. UKFI’s chief executive, Robin Budenberg, said that the market is being monitored “so we are ready to capitalise on suitable disposal opportunities as they emerge”. “The evolution of value in Lloyds Banking Group and RBS will be heavily determined by external factors over the next few years – in particular the speed and strength of recovery of the UK economy and the other markets in which the banks operate, and the resolution of current international and domestic policy debates on reform of the regulatory framework for banking,” Budenberg said. While shares in Lloyds and RBS remain below the average prices at which they were bought by the taxpayer – 72.2p and 50.2p – making it difficult for any sell-off to proceed, UKFI has begun the process of selling Northern Rock , nationalised in February 2008. The annual report provides more information on the options considered for Northern Rock – which has divided into a new bank that is lending again and a “bad” bank that has been merged with the mortgage book of Bradford & Bingley. “A full range of options was analysed, including a sale process where Northern Rock plc could be acquired by a new entrant or in-market player (including remutualisation through a sale to an existing mutual organisation), a standalone remutualisation and a public share offering,” UKFI said. “The risk-adjusted financial assessment indicated that a sale to a single buyer would likely deliver greatest value to the taxpayer. This assessment was principally based on the strategic premium a bidder could be willing to pay, economies of scale that might be achieved in a combination and potential bidder interest in the company,” it added. Remutualisation of Northern Rock – favoured by some campaigners for banking reform – would involve “gifting” existing shares to mutual members, UKFI said. UKFI paid £85,000 of bonuses for the performance year 1 December 2009 – 30 November 2010, of which £36,000 was paid out and £49,000 was retained because bonuses are deferred over three years and subject to clawback in line with the arrangements now in place at the banks in which UKFI has stakes. The average prices at which the taxpayer bought shares in the banks falls to 63.1p for Lloyds if fees paid to exit the asset protection scheme – which protects toxic loans for RBS – are included and to 49.9p if fees paid by RBS are included. UKFI’s calculations on the losses on the stakes is taken at 31 March when RBS was trading at 40.49p and Lloyds at 58.09p. The shares have fallen further since then, to 33.5p and 43p respectively. Banking Financial sector Lloyds Banking Group Royal Bank of Scotland Regulators Jill Treanor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …No, it’s not Elizabeth Warren, but Richard Cordray should be considered a worthy substitute. He certainly has the credibility and the endorsement by none other than Warren herself. Columbus Dispatch: President Barack Obama will nominate former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to head a powerful new consumer protection agency, White House officials said. At a White House event Monday, Obama will announce his choice of Cordray, 52, who is currently serving as director of enforcement for the new agency called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Warren, who hand-picked Cordray to serve in the agency shortly after his loss in last November’s elections, expressed support for his selection. “Rich has always had my strong support because he is tough and he is smart-and that’s exactly the combination this new agency needs,” she said. “He was one of the first senior leaders I recruited for the agency, and his work and commitment have made it clear that he will make a stellar director.” This appointment would seem to bolster the argument that Warren will challenge Scott Brown for the Senate seat he and the Tea Party snatched away from Democrats in January 2010. Oh, by the way…Cordray is a 5-time undefeated Jeopardy champion too, with some impressive educational credentials to go with the resume. I double-dog dare those Republican Senators to think they can toss questions at a guy who can probably remember the last gaffe they made on Fox News. They risk abject humiliation.
Continue reading …After starring in the biggest wedding in a generation and traveling the world with her new hubby, new-royal Kate Middleton has a new challenge in store for her: Summer holidays with the in-laws. Only in this case, one in-law includes Queen Elizabeth II, of course. The Queen has invited the…
Continue reading …