DeBellefeuille brought suit after his 13-year-old son Jax learned that his art teacher was selling merchandise — mugs, cushions, etc. — with his students' art work printed on it.
I don't know if it affects the legal issue, but the assignment had been to do works in the style of Jean-Michel Basquiat.
Quite aside from the teacher's appropriation of the children's work, what do you think of the original assignment? Note that each image is titled with the student's name plus "Creepy Portrait." Would you like your children required to draw/paint creepy versions of themselves? Shouldn't children be uplifted and encouraged to see themselves in a positive way? Here, the idea is to look at yourself and see sickness, decay, ghoulishness, and despair.Teacher accused of selling students' art without permission https://t.co/OXQbrM6FaC #artgate #quebec #saintlazare #canada
— Joel DeBellefeuille (@DeBellefeuille_) February 13, 2024
Posts
58 comments:
More lawlessness by the Left. But it is Canada. So there's that.
How is a teacher even possibly thinking this is a good idea?
When truth is stranger than fiction!
Did the teacher have a note allowing his commercial use of student work product from school? Does the student whose work is appropriated for sale get a royalty?
Does the school where the work was performed get a royalty?
Is the teacher about to learn about lawsuits, real quick?
It’s good basquiat- I didn’t need the prompt to tell that's what they were going for- nice job kids!
Kind of cool teachers are discovering how much they can get away with. No way there’s consequences for the teacher here…even in Canada.
I mean there’s some Bacon, maybe some Munch there too but still…
Ben Stiller played this character in Happy Gilmore. “Great news! Four more hours of arts and crafts!”
Sign of the times sadly.
so may be all kids need to be paid to attend public school [advance reparations for future grievances]
Pure theft. I love all those artworks, though- awesome for preteen and teens.
That will be his defense.
"I didn't steal anything that wasn't neo-expressionist. I'm not a monster."
They should have been required to paint themselves as morbidly obese, you know, as a body positivity exercise (oh wait, can I say exercise in this context?)
Oh, yes. The assignment is appalling. Devil worship, macabre, etc. I'm surprised the little snowflakes didn't get therapy.
Everything should be expression of happy happy joy joy
Long live, long live Comrade Kim Il Sung!
Long live, long live Comrade Kim Il Sung!
Kim Il Sung, Kim Il Sung, hurrah! Hurrah!
Kim Il Sung, Kim Il Sung, hurrah! Hurrah!
This would have been a wonderful thing if he had included the kids and let them keep the money, but now he's the Snidely Whiplash of art teachers.
Would you like your children required to draw/paint creepy versions of themselves? Shouldn't children be uplifted and encouraged to see themselves in a positive way?
In a long-ago era, say, 20 years ago, the paintings might be a cute exercise. But in an era where so many children are emotionally damaged -- or are socially rewarded for portraying themselves as such -- this is a horrible assignment.
At that age I would have loved the assignment. Letting the kids sell their artwork might have given a little economics lesson.
WaPo comments currently about 50/50 between folks like us and those looking for some justification for supporting a hardworking underpaid teacher.
Althouse observes: "Shouldn't children be uplifted and encouraged to see themselves in a positive way?
Here, the idea is to look at yourself and see sickness, decay, ghoulishness, and despair."
Hey, the teacher was just doing what journalists and artists pride themselves on: afflicting the comfortable.
All 3 occupations are noble callings indeed. Just ask them.
Obviously this is theft of intellectual property —no proper release by the kids, and the kids not properly informed and the kids underage. It would also raise privacy concerns since the kids’ names are being published, again without proper consent.
How did this dude think he could get away with such a BS scheme?
"More lawlessness by the Left. But it is Canada. So there's that."
Apparently, you believe anything that happens anywhere in the world that you disapprove of is "lawlessness by the left."
Hah!
Would you like your children required to draw/paint creepy versions of themselves?
No
Shouldn't children be uplifted and encouraged to see themselves in a positive way?
Well, it’s Canada you know.
mikee:
Did the teacher have a note allowing his commercial use of student work product from school?
The "note" would have to be an actual release form and signed by the parent(s).
Does the student whose work is appropriated for sale get a royalty?
That will come in the form of the settlement of a copyright lawsuit.
The friggin' teacher's a thief.
Owen:
How did this dude think he could get away with such a BS scheme?
Teacher.
These look like eight year olds drew them. Not only is the art teacher repellent, he's incompetent.
What do you think of the original assignment? Note that each image is titled with the student's name plus "Creepy Portrait." Would you like your children required to draw/paint creepy versions of themselves?
It sounds interesting, and we are not told whether the assignment followed a "draw your best self" assignment or not. (Both this article and your Basquiat link go to paywalled WaPo, although I was able to peek around the the log-in to see the Basquiat link is about someone faking his works.)
Being able to draw "emotions" would be cool. I'm so old I remember something like this where kids were encouraged to draw their angry self instead of being angry and draw their happy self to encourage happiness. Not sure why both were ameliorative. But that's just forgetting with a small f. No biggie.
Hard NO on the unauthorized sales though. That is kinda creepy.
"Shouldn't children be uplifted and encouraged to see themselves in a positive way?"
Even the white ones? Wouldn't that interfere with their DEI indoctrination?
Cook says "'More lawlessness by the Left. But it is Canada. So there's that.'
Apparently, you believe anything that happens anywhere in the world that you disapprove of is 'lawlessness by the left.'"
Well, here it is a teacher (highly left field) from Canada (more left than America) doing something lawless (copyright infringement, exploitation of minors, privacy violations, etc.). So the message seems to be that only Cook is allowed to extrapolate from a single instance to a broader world view.
On the scale of what teachers are usually up to these days, it beats grooming them for sex, or convincing them to mutilate themselves.
Good job Mr. Art Teacher!
"Today, we're going to paint pretty girls on the back of Harleys."
over the last 250 years.. our United States have spent considerable time, blood and money;
trying to incorporate the Canadian Provinces into our Nation.. We have failed, time and time again.
Looking at Canada now.. Let us All take a moment, to Thank GOD for our Failures.
Canadians are weird, and foreign.. THANK YOU GOD ALMIGHTY!
Cook:
At least in America, artists are entitled to compensation for their creative work. It's right in the Constitution. Since Canada is/was a Commonwealth country, I'm assuming the same in Canada.
Apparently, you believe anything that happens anywhere in the world that you disapprove of is "lawlessness by the left."
Well it is usually a fairly safe assumption. And here we have Canada and an art teacher.
These look like eight year olds drew them.
On second look they are a little remedial for 13-year-olds.
Their next art teacher should have them paint portraits of their old art teacher in the style of the New Objectivists.
I don't see anything wrong with the assignment. He's encouraging the kids to look at themselves in new and unusual ways. I think that's healthy. There's no evidence that self-esteem-focused approaches to learning accomplish anything and I think it's healthy to be able to laugh at yourself. The boys, especially, I bet, loved it.
As for his selling the work, I laughed. My wife laughed. But if we were parents one of the students, we'd probably feel violated. Or at least cheated that our child didn't get a cut of the profits.
DEI+academic activism. #NoJudgment #NoLabels
Here, the idea is to look at yourself and see sickness, decay, ghoulishness, and despair.
When you have a green haired, nose ring, rainbow flag waiving, overweight, non-binary, liberal indoctrinated 4th grade teachers who despises zim/zer's students' parents, what is it we expect?
Then again. Everyone in Canada is going broke in Trudeau's economy so a side hustle is probably necessary.
"Cook says 'More lawlessness by the Left. But it is Canada. So there's that.'"
No, I did not say that. I copied and pasted a comment by another commenter.
Shouldn't children be uplifted and encouraged to see themselves in a positive way? Here, the idea is to look at yourself and see sickness, decay, ghoulishness, and despair.
I think (a) most 13 year olds probably get a kick out of drawing themselves in a "creepy" style, and (b) for an art class, this seems like a good way of getting children out of a mindset where they're trying (and failing) to draw something that looks either realistic or beautiful and idealised, and into just playing loosely with form and colour. I don't think this is much of an issue with gradeschoolers, but by middle school, my impression and recollection is that a lot of children feel a lot more shy about doing art in public because they're very conscious that some of their peers now have much better technical skills than they have. This kind of exercise obviously doesn't erase those skill gaps, but unlike, say, drawing a bust of a human head in charcoal or conte crayon, this is an exercise where everyone can produce a piece that they can feel satisfied the assignment.
"At least in America, artists are entitled to compensation for their creative work."
Sure. I'm taking issue with your asserting this teacher is a "leftist," apparently because he is engaging in improper behavior, which, I gather from you, is always and only the behavior of "lefties," and all teachers are "lefties."
I cannot read the article as I don't want to pay to read it. Does the article say he is a leftist? Does the teacher identify himself as a leftist? Lefty or righty, he certainly should be sanctioned for appropriating the works of his students and collecting income resulting from his misuse.
I question your characterization as you have a tendency to rant about "lefties" without sourcing or support or sense.
“Apparently, you believe anything that happens anywhere in the world that you disapprove of is ‘lawlessness by the left.’”
Apparently, Cool lives in a world where it’s remotely possible that a
- Canadian
- Art
- Teacher
- Stealing intellectual property
is anything but a leftist.
"Imagine I showed the students a bunch of works by Jean-Michel Basquiat, explained how and why is one of the most important artists of the past century; explained that the artwork he made was all about energy… then blasted some frenetic jazz as I roamed around the class continually prompting and pushing them to add more with the messiest material possible: soft pastels!!!
Here are a few of the results my Grade 7 & 8 students achieved…"
- Mario Perron, the art teacher.
I really don't see the problem with the assignment, except for the adulation of the heroin addict/graffiti artist.
How is it a "sweatshop"? or at least any different from any other class. Bullshit journalism (is there any other kinbd?) for use of the word sweatshop.
It raises a question in my mind, who owns the copyright on a work of art, a poem, an essay or whatever that a kid creates in school on school time on school instructions?
If I create something at work the employer generally owns the rights to it. Especially if it was something I was supposed to create.
What rights, if any, does a student have to, say, a picture created in art class? What rights does the school have? I doubt the teach ever has any making this very wrong.
John Henry
They’d make some cool album covers.
Is there some kind of test for public school teachers to determine if they are sufficiently degenerate, perverted, cruel, wicked, and stupid enough, or is being a Democrat Party member simply proof enough?
Rafe said...
“Apparently, you believe anything that happens anywhere in the world that you disapprove of is ‘lawlessness by the left.’”
Apparently, Cool lives in a world where it’s remotely possible that a
- Canadian
- Art
- Teacher
- Stealing intellectual property
is anything but a leftist.“
I’ll add that the school is in Montreal which is decidedly left of the center in Canada.
Here, the idea is to look at yourself and see sickness, decay, ghoulishness, and despair.
Critical Diversity Theory
I always envisioned myself as the son of Stork delivering the... whatever.
It raises a question in my mind, who owns the copyright on a work of art, a poem, an essay or whatever that a kid creates in school on school time on school instructions?
In America, copyright vests in the creator unless there is a specific contract assigning his/her rights away (and then, with respect to "works made for hire," only as to certain specific types of works) or the work is created by an employee in the course of their regular work duties.
Here, the kids were not employees, were paid nothing (and indeed their parents paid the teacher through taxes/tuition), and were basically forced to attend the class and prepare the artworks. So in America, the individual students would own the copyrights.
I believe in Canada the law is pretty similar other than the employer can never be considered the author (but can be the original owner), so it seems pretty certain that this teacher is a copyright infringer multiple times over.
At least in America, artists are entitled to compensation for their creative work. It's right in the Constitution.
Not exactly right. Artists are entitled to prevent others from receiving compensation for the artist's creative work without the artist's consent, but there is no Constitutional right that the artist (or anyone else) receive compensation for a creative work. No right to money, only to preclude others from making money. Same with patents.
Lest this seem "cute," know that the teacher, Mario Perron, was selling these for as much as $160 on the teacher’s personal website. Of course, his website, linkedin and facebook page are no longer available...
Sad.
I like kid art. I have four pieces of kid art hanging in my house. I paid my great niece $100 for a terrific sketch of Audrey Hepburn. Also commissioned a co-worker’s son to paint some pictures of my dogs. The kid was starting to work with acrylics, I look at them everyday and hope that maybe it inspired him to continue his work.
Darkisland:
How is it a "sweatshop"? or at least any different from any other class.
Selling student's work w/o permission.
It raises a question in my mind, who owns the copyright on a work of art, a poem, an essay or whatever that a kid creates in school on school time on school instructions?
Been done. The student. As the student isn't paid under contract, the student. In fact, the argument is easily that the student (through their parents) is paying the instructor.
If I create something at work the employer generally owns the rights to it. Especially if it was something I was supposed to create.
And got paid for it. Don't forget that part. Your employer is paying for your time. If you work on something else for yourself, you're stealing from the employer. If you were assigned to create it, that's contract labor. The employer owns the product in both cases.
What rights, if any, does a student have to, say, a picture created in art class? What rights does the school have?
1) complete 2) none. That's the US. As this is Canada, I don't know for sure.
If you have an inkling the teacher/school might do this, post your work to the internet prior to handing it in. Even to a private account.
From article:
They must not copy the late New York painter’s art, the teacher wrote in a note to students. “I am very familiar with Basquiat’s work and will return copied work, because it is considered plagiarism.”
What a fucking hypocrite.
I have two points: 1) Did the teacher actually sell any of the "art"? Anyone who's ever owned a condo knows there's a big difference between advertising for sale and actually "selling".
2) No one who names their child 'Jax' gets any sympathy from me.
I think the assignment was fascinating. A lot of journaling consist of expressing your feelings of fear so that you become aware of what you’re really feeling. In a way this may not be appropriate for young people, but I don’t really know young people. I think it might be liberating though for a class to get past their need to be perfect and to conform to some ideal view of beauty, and just be humorous about how they really see themselves.
However the betrayal by the teacher on one level is so horrible and yet at the same time it’s really very educational because that is the real world. You really cannot automatically trust people just because they are in a position of authority. You can’t automatically trust people and stay in the state of dependency. It’s something they’ll always remember.
The teacher will explain that he was letting the students know what it was like to be an artist whose work is misused for commercial gain. It wasn't for his capitalistic interest; it was a Marxist lesson in empathy for those abused by capitalism. He won't just be forgiven, he'll be praised.
Robert Cook rants;
I question your characterization as you have a tendency to rant about "lefties" without sourcing or support or sense.
Well, Cookie, like you the teacher assumed he was entitled to be paid for doing nothing. That’s a pretty good working definition of a leftie right there.
tommyesq said...
“Lest this seem ‘cute,’ know that the teacher, Mario Perron, was selling these for as much as $160 on the teacher’s personal website.”
Yea, but the one kid whose art has an asking price of $1.5 million has a no-show job on the board of Burisma.
Tomcc:
I have two points: 1) Did the teacher actually sell any of the "art"?
Doesn't matter. Copyright isn't about sales, it's about distribution.
Anyone who's ever owned a condo knows there's a big difference between advertising for sale and actually "selling".
All the teacher has to do to break copyright is publish the piece w/o permission. If he makes money doing it, you go for damages. If he doesn't, he might just be ordered to take everything down. Don't know the particulars here.
Ok kids. Today we're going to make some mugs. But first, everyone has to have their parents sign this form. It's called a "release."
I like Jolene, Abby, and Grace.
Sue the crap out of the teacher and fire him.
Post a Comment