quote:AP alleges copyright infringement of Obama image
On buttons, posters and Web sites, the image was everywhere during last year's presidential campaign: A pensive Barack Obama looking upward, as if to the future, splashed in a Warholesque red, white and blue and underlined with the caption HOPE.
Designed by Shepard Fairey, a Los-Angeles based street artist, the image has led to sales of hundreds of thousands of posters and stickers, has become so much in demand that copies signed by Fairey have been purchased for thousands of dollars on eBay.
The image, Fairey has acknowledged, is based on an Associated Press photograph, taken in April 2006 by Manny Garcia on assignment for the AP at the National Press Club in Washington.
The AP says it owns the copyright, and wants credit and compensation. Fairey disagrees.
"The Associated Press has determined that the photograph used in the poster is an AP photo and that its use required permission," the AP's director of media relations, Paul Colford, said in a statement.
I disagree with the AP. I think it falls squarely under "fair use".
What do you think?
.
Posted by Jason Davie (Member # 2172) on :
IMO That's fair use.. Its not like he just took the photo and put a word on it
Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
fair
Posted by Dawud Shaheed (Member # 5719) on :
I know people who know people who know Shephard Fairey, before he was "Shephard Fairey".
Posted by Kissymatina (Member # 2028) on :
That's a toughie. I can see the argument for fair use, but his admitting he created it from the AP's photo and the close resemblance is a good argument for it being a derivative work which is infringement.
This one will take some thought.
Posted by Curtis hammond (Member # 2170) on :
quote: for it being a derivative work which is infringement.
Derivative work is not always a violation..
Posted by Craig Sjoquist (Member # 4684) on :
public figuare ... copyright free ..do what ever ya want ..nobody owns it ..unless exact copy from somebody who took picture... be my 2 cents
Posted by Mike O'Neill (Member # 470) on :
This should be an interesting case to follow...
Posted by KARYN BUSH (Member # 1948) on :
fair game...plus there's at least a 10% change.
Posted by George Perkins (Member # 156) on :
I'm with Mike, this should be interesting. How do I feel? I guess I'm split on this one. I've never been big on copy writing photos, I mean anybody can take a picture of the Statue of Liberty That said, I'm also aware that there exist laws covering this sort of thing and I don't go around looking for trouble. This could go either way quite easily.
I find it very interesting that this comes along at the same time this artist is featured on TV commercials bragging about "doing things he's not supposed to and getting away with it" Arrogance, whether done tongue in cheek or not, often pizzes off the wrong people.
Posted by Checkers (Member # 63) on :
The Associated Press owns the copyright of the image and they do offer licensing options for those who are willing to pay. Fair use and derivative work is questionable and there is no such rule as 10% change. Only photos that are owned and/or produced by our government are, to a limit, public domain. With the introduction of quasi-government agencies, some can and do copyright protect their art.
Havin' fun,
Checkers
Posted by Alicia B. Jennings (Member # 1272) on :
Hey, the Ancient Egyptians called. They want compensation for all of the artwork they originally designed. Where does this copyright infringement stuff end?
Posted by Rusty Bradley (Member # 6938) on :
fair...a quick crop job at that...didn't even photoshop out the gold line running into Obama's head.
Posted by Ken Henry (Member # 598) on :
There's somewhat of a precident established some time ago of artwork that was made that was directly derived from a photographic image.
Anyone remember Andy Warhol, and his reknown screenprinted images of Marilyn Monroe ?
This latest contention by the owner of the photograph might have merit.....but then again, maybe not !
Posted by Jeff Ogden (Member # 3184) on :
No infringement...but the artist would be more of a value, as an artist, if he took his own damn picture of Obama.
[ February 05, 2009, 03:13 PM: Message edited by: Jeff Ogden ]
Posted by Mike Pipes (Member # 1573) on :
Fair Use is just an affirmative defense and does not preclude this from being an infringement.
It's infringement. Whether or not the AP gets awarded damages in court if the two parties can not come to an agreement, is a completely different issue.
Posted by Dawud Shaheed (Member # 5719) on :
Posted by The Moon (Member # 452) on :
quote:Originally posted by KARYN BUSH: fair game...plus there's at least a 10% change.
ditto.
The Short n' Sweet side of the Moon
Posted by The Moon (Member # 452) on :
oh yeah... and
damn i've missed you all!
The been dark too long side of the Moon
Posted by Nikki Goral (Member # 7844) on :
So is Shepherd an artist or a vandal???...if you review his "actual" works...
Anyway, it was on FOX the other nite about the poignant image...dramatic to say the least.
I personally don't see much relation to the original image as the piece: 1. has lettering 2. utilizes method other than photographic for the final piece 3. incorporates aspects not found in the original image.
Had he posterized the image EXACTLY as shown (waving flag vs lapel pin, different colored tie, stamped imagery in background and on image plus different colored background and texture)
It's like Warhol using the floating dress imagery of Monroe in his series...or Campbells soup cans...they are recognizable images on their own, but the "derivative" work is completely different. (Sorry Ken, didn't read all the posts before I wrote this!...Great minds...)
If this is the case, then another Signmakers site would be in trouble as they impose their heads on someone else's photos...which I would see as a closer infringement.
Posted by Mike Pipes (Member # 1573) on :
So here's a new twist on the situation.
The photographer who made the photo was a temp hire for AP and signed no contract giving away his rights to the AP such as their staffer/freelancer contract actually stipulates, so technically this isn't even the AP's baby.
The photographer would like to see an agreement made that is fair to all parties involved, and instead of pocketing any monies, donations made to the Red Cross, breast cancer research, and other such causes.
Now, if *that* doesn't paint a picture of "HOPE", nothing does.
Posted by Bruce Evans (Member # 44) on :
#1, fairey is an idiot for ever mentioning that he used the photo. That would have probably been real tough to ever prove.
He does actually go through a pretty tedious manual vectorizing method on his work. It's not just a scan, posterize, vectorize deal.
If anything became of this, it would really open up a can of works for a million other violations.
Posted by Glenn Taylor (Member # 162) on :
I recall FoxNews doing a report on people getting the same design tattoo'd. They even showed the tattoo artist tracing over Fairey's design to create the line art and producing a monochromatic version on some guy's leg.
So who sues whom?
.
Posted by David Harding (Member # 108) on :
AP wants the guy's leg, they're waiting for his arm.
Posted by Joseph Diaz (Member # 5913) on :
Here's one I did for FUN while testing out Corel Painter and my new wacom. Notice how I said fun, as in not for profit. Please don't sue me Posted by Dawud Shaheed (Member # 5719) on :
Ah, whatever. Shephard gets exactly what he wants, FREE EXPOSURE! He's an artist and deep down all artists want people to notice their work. he definitely has that. And some money.
Posted by Glenn Taylor (Member # 162) on :
quote:Originally posted by David Harding: AP wants the guy's leg, they're waiting for his arm.
Good article, Glenn. Fairey has lost all my sympathy and now I sorta hope AP rips him a new one. He's not even a great artist and has gotten rich using other peoples work.
Posted by KARYN BUSH (Member # 1948) on :
i think i just saw that he got arrested in boston...it was at the bottom of a ticker banner...said obama artist arrested in boston...not sure if that's who they are referring to.
Posted by Rick Chavez (Member # 2146) on :
By the way I have been a big fan of Shepard Fairey since 1989 when he plastered San Diego with Andre the Giant. Street artists have a habit of taking images and twisting them for whatever commentary they wish to make. In this case, there is a limit to how far street artists can go when that commentary turns into cash.
[ February 08, 2009, 02:45 PM: Message edited by: Rick Chavez ]
Posted by Dawud Shaheed (Member # 5719) on :
Wow, that last link is a smoking gun against Mr. Fairey.
but come to think of it, what's the difference between Shephard Fairey stealing his images (that he doesn't seem to try to hide the fact he's stealing them) And selling his shirts or posters and the Sign guy who gets an order, goes on brands of the world, snags the image. Works it up and sells it to his customer. Surely there's a few of us guilty of that eh?
Someone explain the difference to me.
It's kind of like when Hip Hop first came out and sampled the mess out of soul, funk, classic rock, jazz. Nobody cared until the hip hop artists started making money, then all the old soul/jazz/classic rock and funksters came crawling out the woodworks with their hands out. Not saying they don't have the right, just saying nobody was riding Shephard fairey's underoos so hard when he was broke. So as always, yes. it boils down to the cabbage.
[ February 08, 2009, 07:13 PM: Message edited by: Dawud Shaheed ]
Posted by Mike O'Neill (Member # 470) on :
New Twist
from Newsweek
Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
Would you like a copy of a Copyright Agreement!
[ February 13, 2009, 08:12 PM: Message edited by: Stephen Deveau ]
Posted by Ian Stewart-Koster (Member # 3500) on :
Sounds like his little game has been found out...
Posted by Bill Biggs (Member # 18) on :
Share with one another is what my Mom always said. If he got paid and used their photo, he infringed without permission, If he would have asked for a release, beforehand. He would be in the clear for doing so. Remember "Ask and ye shall receive" Bill PS, did they ask him if they could copy his copy?
[ February 14, 2009, 10:02 AM: Message edited by: Bill Biggs ]
Posted by Jon Butterworth (Member # 227) on :
I am myself treading the fine line of "copywrite"
My current passion in artworks uses aboriginal styles and drawings thousands of years old.
These peoples "artworks" have been exploited to the extent that they get peanuts for works seling for hundreds of dollors not to mention abusing their culture.
I have survived so far on the fact I do not sell my paintings but are done as gifts for friends or kept for myself.
#2 I have talked with and worked with aboriginal elders. We respect each other. I am learning what the symbols mean as that art is their written language and history tales,
#3 One "ABBO" artist in particular has become a friend and we want to blend modern and ancient into beautiful stuff. for sale ,,, proceeds 100% into educating kids!
[ February 14, 2009, 11:53 AM: Message edited by: Jon Butterworth ]
Posted by Ray Rheaume (Member # 3794) on :
There's a fine line between inspiration and infringement.
Personally, I think Fairey made sufficient enough alterations to the original photo to beat an copyright charge, but I fully expect Fox news will keep this story in the public eye well after the other mainstream media has forgotten it. They're not as "fair and balanced" as they say...
Rapid
Posted by Glenn Taylor (Member # 162) on :
C'mon Ray. Lets stay on topic. Lets not cheapen it by trying to pull an Alinsky.
Its an important topic for our industry. Lets treat it as such.
Thanks.
.
Posted by Glenn Taylor (Member # 162) on :
Now back to the topic. If the AP wins, what does that do to merchants such as UrbanOutfitters.Com?
This is a serious issue that we should be talking about. My concern is what happens if you use a photograph that you don't own as reference material for a paid project?
[ February 14, 2009, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: Glenn Taylor ]
Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
I agree!
But now let us 'HOPE!'
Sorry that word is a copyright!
Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
Glenn
This is very true..... Get it in writing Ask for the signature!
Copyright!
[ February 14, 2009, 09:34 PM: Message edited by: Stephen Deveau ]
Posted by David Harding (Member # 108) on :
...and HOPE you BARack CODE it!
[ February 14, 2009, 11:31 PM: Message edited by: David Harding ]
Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
Gee! David!
Why don't you put that thumb in your mouth?
Because I have never seen anything.. pertaining to 'Artwork' on you end of this format.
[ February 15, 2009, 10:48 AM: Message edited by: Stephen Deveau ]
Posted by Jon Jantz (Member # 6137) on :
David's humor is a work o fart.
/edited to add: oops sorry bout the spacing problem...
[ February 15, 2009, 01:09 PM: Message edited by: Jon Jantz ]
Posted by Jon Butterworth (Member # 227) on :
jon to jon ... mate, never get into a BAR fight you can't win ... copy? .. over and out!
[ February 15, 2009, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: Jon Butterworth ]
Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
Hey 'David' likes to blow gas from his Azz!
Maybe one day I will show him the 'Atlantic Ocean'
'Would you like to go fishing?' Just sharks and other creatures of the deep.
[ February 15, 2009, 05:45 PM: Message edited by: Stephen Deveau ]
Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
Sorry I forgot to tell you about the 6 foot jelly fish! How is your thumb now Mother Sucker!
[ February 15, 2009, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: Stephen Deveau ]
Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
weren't you leaving?
Posted by Carl Wood (Member # 1223) on :
sounds like a cat-fight. . . .around the "urban" areas of Memphis they are selling Obammer t-shirts on every other street corner, some even in traffic at stop lights. . .wonder how many, if any, have permission to do so?
Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
Doug take your glasses off! Lets see your soul.
Now I am back for the fight in life!
And not one of my words can be copyright..... 'Images Only.'
[ February 15, 2009, 05:36 PM: Message edited by: Stephen Deveau ]
Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
Think about it!
Words are just Words!
Images are a thousand words.
Posted by Ray Rheaume (Member # 3794) on :
Found this little gem...
This is a quote from Mannie Garcia, the person who took the photo in 2006.
"I have never been an AP staff employee, and no, I have never signed an AP contract... The ownership of the copyright is in dispute, as per the AP. It is my understanding that since I was not a staffer, and was not a freelancer, and did not sign any contract, that I am the owner of the copyright, but I am in discussions with the AP over this issue. "
Looks like the real story here is not about the Mr. Fairey, but the AP's claim that they own the image copyright.
[ February 15, 2009, 06:58 PM: Message edited by: Ray Rheaume ]
Posted by Jon Jantz (Member # 6137) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jon Butterworth: jon to jon ... mate, never get into a BAR fight you can't win ... copy? .. over and out!
BA... Roger wilCO DEre buddy.... Posted by Dawud Shaheed (Member # 5719) on :
quote:Originally posted by Carl Wood: wonder how many, if any, have permission to do so?
Carl, c'mon man. do you really wonder? Some people can't even afford to eat. Live in substandard conditions and some of them rob, steal and sell drugs to live. Do you really wonder about permission to sell a t-shirt? I know many street vendors in "urban" areas as you call them. Permission, probably not. Robbing and stealing, No. Things work a little different in "the hood".
Posted by David Harding (Member # 108) on :
![[I Don t Know]](graemlins/dunno.gif)
That said, I'm also aware that there exist laws covering this sort of thing and I don't go around looking for trouble.
![[Rolling On The Floor]](graemlins/rolf.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
