Danny Quirk

"December 19, 2015 - As artists, we find the ‘Fair Use’ doctrine to sometimes be beneficial, but sometimes to be extremely disturbing. I guess illustrator Danny Quirk subscribes to the latter according to a post he made concerning Madonna using his work on her shows under that doctrine. Danny has a series of illustrations called Dissections which shows medical sketches (the kind you find in old medical books), combined with living humans. This was his senior project for Pratt institute. Danny claims that an artist called BessNYC4 [NSFW] pasted a photo of Maddona’s face on his drawing and that they were used in her social media. Any many young artists, Danny was first very happy for the fact that his art was so widely exposed. But then he realized that he was not getting any credit for his illustrations. Danny claims that he tried contacting Maddona’s agent and got no response. Danny got even angrier when he discovered that those illustrations were also used in Madonna’s shows. Being annoyed he posted about it until his lawyer told him to take the post down as BessNYC4’s work was protected under the Fair Use doctrine for being transformative enough. Danny got annoyed enough that he shared his frustration on his page which got thousands of likes, shares and comments. I am attaching his letter after the jump. First and foremost … I just want to deliver an open, and honest “F**K YOU” to the “Fair Use Act”, and an ACTUAL “what the F*K!?!?” to those it protects. Almost a year ago to date (Jan 2015) I awoke to a barrage of texts stating my work was popping up on Madonna’s FB, IG, and Twitter, with tens of thousands of likes, shares, comments, etc. ! ! At first, I thought … “WHOAH! / COOL!“ but shortly there after, it sunk in. I contacted her agent, and received absolutely no response. In the meantime, I found out digital collage artist BessNYC4 was the one who ‘made’ the work, sending it to her, merging MY ART with her head, and reaping all the benefits.. Things petered out, and I more or less forgot about it; u n t i l … early Oct 2015. I found out (for all intents and purposes) my art was used in her concerts, despite my attempts at getting proper credit acknowledgment, etc. I made a post to build momentum / got a lawyer, and was hoping for justice. My lawyer said “PULL THE POST!” and it was determined the work was ‘transformative’ under the “Fair Use Act”, which protected them / her and the coinciding articles (which came from momentum of the post covering the ordeal) made ME out to be the bad guy. WHY? Anyone with eyes can see… anyhow, this is a rant how WE ARTISTS are taken advantage of, and how laws protect everyone except for who they should, as you can see in THREE of my pieces … anyhow, I’m not thrilled. Pass along if y’all agree (maybe we can build momentum?) Thanks, Danny # " SOURCE She not only posted his photos on instagram, which is not a copyright infrigement, but also used them on concerts, from which she earns money and that is a plagiarism INDEED. What happened later? We read on Danny's facebook profile: "Whelp, just as the last post was garnering momentum, Nipple Police flagged the 5 pixels by 5 pixels of painted nipple, and the post about the uncredited use of imagery containing my artwork in Madonna's social media pages and concerts was taken down due to a ''nudity violation''. Anyhow, thank you to everyone for the support / getting the ball rolling / helping get the word out, and helping to make a stink about us 'unknown' artist's work being misused by household names." They removed his posts trying to shut him up. Few months ago I remember reporting a page on facebook called "Tits of pornstars"( after translation) with hunderds of photos and they replied to me there is no violation of fb regulamin. Pathetic. Madonna has many friends/ fans/ workers who try to hide the truth about her unoriginality and thievish nature. Many videos showing her plagiarisms and rip offs were removed from youtube or muted due to copyright infrigement of.. Madonna's music, not original. Even my secret project part 16 was deleted for using "her" song 'the beast within' not Fairuz'es voice samples. Video showing Sam Haskins rip off doesn't violate any copyrights but was removed from public view and is shown only for people who have a LINK. Many photos from Super Amanda's listal were removed too. On whosampled they reject my submissions about Mandonna sampling others and even delete old, accepted submissions which were there for years( She's not me sampling Sezen Aksu's yaz or Like a virgin and 4 Tops- I can't help myself).  Keep trying little menopausers but the truth always comes out. Sooner or later.