The Arts Skyline in 2015

Monday, February 13 and
Monday, February 27
Straw Restaurant
203 Octavia Boulevard, San Francisco (map)

Join EAP and special guests from SFMOMA, SF Jazz and the Oakland Museum of California for candid conversations about new and re-imagined buildings for the arts.

Ten percent of food sales on Mondays in February goes to EAP, so come to Straw for a lightly moderated no-host dinner/discussion with your colleagues. This is your chance to pick the brains of the folks whose jobs in the arts are being transformed by major building projects, and support EAP in the process.

Guests include:
Claire Ball, Project Assistant, Oakland Museum of California
Megan Brian, Education and Public Programs Coordinator, SFMOMA *Former EAP Fellow
Barrett Shaver, Membership Director, SF Jazz
Melanie Hwang, Membership Manager, SFMOMA
Louise Yokoi, Development Associate, Individual Giving, SFMOMA *Former EAP Fellow

RSVP: Save your seat by e-mailing

26 replies
      • Andy
        Andy says:

        What a lame excuse this is. I hope Thomas involves an IP lawyer to get paid properly. And that includes damages for the violation of copyright. An "Arts Professionals" organization that steals content…. You suck.

      • Rob
        Rob says:

        From YOUR advice:

        Your ideas are yours, not the city’s. When you present your proposal, put your name, copyright, and date on every page and slide. By doing this, you prevent others who may borrow or “appropriate” your idea to be built by someone else.

        Title vs. copyright. Never sign your copyright off to the city. You own that! Remember Prince? He had to change his name to a symbol to get out of a copyright dispute.

        I guess copyright rules dont apply to you?

      • Ward
        Ward says:

        Lame. If you don't know who took a photo that you want to use, it's YOUR responsibility to find out. If you can't, then you MAY NOT use the photo! How simple is that? You're lame.

  1. Thomas Hawk
    Thomas Hawk says:

    adamcfong, my objection has more to do with the fact that the SFMOMA bounced me out of their museum on my ass. Quite literally — had two security guards throw me out to the curb even though I was a paying member supporting their fine institution, with lewd hand gestures as part of my wonderful eviction. What's worse they accused me of voyeurism (the very thing they had a show about within a year of my ejection) when I was merely shooting architecture with a 14mm ultrawide angle lens in their lobby.

    Where is the apology for this egregious behavior on their part? I'm owed this and I won't forget this. Ask yourself why they have made zero attempt to contact me or right this wrong even after many years. Shouldn't we demand more accountability than this from our institutions?

    Instead my copyrighted photography is pilfered to promote their work and agenda despite this sort of personal abuse. The image in question is in fact mine. I took that photo with my very own camera. The same camera I was holding in my hands when the SF MOMA proudly strutted like a peacock and booted my ass to the street. So much respect for the working artist.

    I own copyright on the image. If I wanted to I could retaliate and sue your organization and make you pay me a few thousand dollars or more, but that's not what I'm about. I just find it ironic that imagery of mine is being used to promote an institution that treats its members so horribly.

    I'd be interested to know why Melanie Hwang, Louise Yokoi and Megan Brian think I deserve the treatment that I received from SFMOMA — given that they/you are now using my work to promote the SF MOMA agenda. I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer.

  2. Rob
    Rob says:

    So apparently your organization is pro theft, pro censorship? What the heck art community are you trying to promote. If I were an emerging artist, I would not want any advice from an organization that has no issue with theft of art and the suppression of speech.

  3. adamcfong
    adamcfong says:

    Hi everyone: Thomas and I are now in touch directly, but I want to respond here, too. We made a mistake in using the photo without doing due diligence, and for that I apologize and will not make excuses. We've removed the photo from our posts and materials and will cease to use it. -Adam

  4. Thomas Hawk
    Thomas Hawk says:

    Adam, what's up with the censorship? What is wrong with people having an open and honest debate about this issue? Nobody is being offensive. Isn't censorship really at tremendous odds with the arts generally speaking? What good comes out of censoring people who are respectfully disagreeing with you? You've censored me now three times. I've asked you both publicly and privately what's up with the censorship and you won't answer that question. Why not?

  5. Rob
    Rob says:


    You really must work on your censorship skills. You deleted my reply to your "we apologized, its all good" post but WordPress still remembers so it counts 3 replies, despite only two showing. There has to be someone in your organization geeky enough to make WordPress think there were only 2.

    Really sad that you delete the post that talks about a "teachable moment." Do you have a PR department?

  6. michaeldelong
    michaeldelong says:

    We at EAP are extremely sorry for the following: the use without permission of a copyrighted photograph, the deleting of comments from our blog, and the inconvenience for all involved.

    To be perfectly clear: SFMOMA had no part in choosing the image for this event.

    Similarly, EAP claims no involvement in or prior knowledge of any history between Mr. Hawk and SFMOMA, and has no comment on said history.

    The lesson learned for EAP is the importance of clearly-stated policies for all aspects of our online publishing, and to make sure that each of our members with publishing rights is fully apprised of these policies.

    Thank you.

  7. Rob
    Rob says:

    Ill take you at your word that WordPress ate my post. This was in response to Adam:

    But just saying “we made a mistake” really doesn’t suffice and the excuses are well documented:

    1 – you knowingly use an image without permission believing that just because it had been posted somewhere on the web, it was free

    2 – once it was pointed out that you were using the image without permission, your reaction was to give an excuse and offer to credit it – as soon as TH proved it was his. Never mind that you STILL didnt have permission to use it, you felt that merely adding credit made it better. Your actions indicated that you didnt think you ever needed permission and were only offering credit because you got caught.

    You had an opportunity for a teachable moment – one that would benefit MANY of the emerging artist you claim as your audience. You could have openly discussed the chain of events that lead to the use and subsequent identification of misuse and pointed out how it could have been avoided. You could have highlighted the dangers of using “found” content without due diligence. You could have discussed the tools to find unauthorized use and how the community is the strongest tool for stopping unauthorized use. Instead you hid behind excuses, censorship and lack of accountability.

    Saying “my bad” does not make thing better.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply