RE NYTIMES
article: Sven Robert Hillman writes:
Hey there,
Though, I'm based in Canada, I do keep a regular eye on the New York Times,
and I couldn't help but notice the article Matthew Mirapaul wrote, Museum's
Cyberpeeping Artwork Has Its Plug Pulled which outlined how this work
had been closed down by the New Museum.
I wondered if any of the artists, or in fact the curators (who I understand
were acting independently of the New Museum), would like to comment on
this?
Christian Hübler of Knowbotic Research is quoted as saying that
"because when I work with the border as an artist, I want to know
at least what the border might be."
This comment made me wonder what kind of legal investigation had preceded
the installation of the work - on behalf of the artists, and the curators,
and in fact the museum?
As a native of Europe (I'm originally from Denmark), I couldn't help note
Mirapaul's comment, that "European digital artists are more politicized
than their American counterparts ...".
Aside from the fact that this is a fairly meaningless generalisation (though
not strictly 'artists' as such, one can't help reflecting on the fact
that RTMark are US based, as are the collective, RSG, who feature in the
exhibition with their 'cultural' version of the FBI software, Carnivore),
how do the curators view this comment? [See also Alex Galloway's comments
to this effect.--SD]
Is there a paucity of intellectual political debate in the public artistic
sphere, on issues around privacy, secuity, and open information?
If so, why is this the case?
As a colleague of mine pointed out to me as we read the Times this morning,
one can't help remembering the overwhelming array of US-based events and
movements which have promoted the open exchange of information, and have
highlighted the insecurity of electronic networks. To mention but a few,
the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) was founded in the US, Phil Zimmerman
released his PGP book from there, PGP was invented there, the free softwaee
movement came from the US, the main PGP encryption algorithims (RSA/Diffe
Helman) were invented in the US to promote public encryption, and the
first big hacker cases were in the US.
These things have been major issues in the Public Domain. Have they not
impacted on art discourses in the States at all? And if so, why has this,
rather minor technical and legal issue come as such a surprise, causing
such a fracas? Is the new media artworld in the US so new/naive to these
discourses, that a minor activity such as port scanning could cause such
a controversy?
I'd be interested in the responses of both the artists, and the curators,
on these points.
Yours
Sven Robert Hillman
Winnipeg, Canada
svenrobert2@yahoo.ca
|
Location
On
the US legal bug
7.5.:
<nettime>
PDS
7.5.:
Re: <nettime> [L. Brown]
7.5.:
Re:
<nettime>
[F. Cramer]
8.5.:Re:
<nettime> KR
8.5.:
scan
reports
9.5.:
Server
Migration US
Port
scanning is legal in the US
10.5.:
provider vs kr
CRACKED
..Minds of concern::breakingnews...!!
May 12,2002
13.5.:New
York Times Article
RE2:
NYTIMES article
RE2:
NYTIMES article
RE:3
NYTIMES article: KR
15.5.:
wired article
[
thing] review
19.5.:
Sonntagszeitung
13.6.: neural.it
14.6.:NZZ
(original
article)
Invitation to the open source exhibition
curated by Steve Dietz and Jenny Markatou (?)
|