We filed our answer to The AP's counterclaims yesterday, and it's attached below. The interesting part is at the end, where we illustrate the double standard the AP seems to employ when it comes to using copyrighted works.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Fairey Answer to AP Counterclaims.pdf | 835.22 KB |
Congratulations on your defense against the hypocritical press. Don't let them bully you around! Excellent work on exposing their hypocrisy with all the photos of copyrighted works they have stolen images of (and profit from). Hopefully some common sense and logic will come into play so that these bullies can take their nonsense and shut up about it. They are truly out of line, trying to gain compensation for things that aren't theirs to begin with. The arrogance of the Associated Press is mind-blowing sometimes.
Why don't you guys work out a settlement and stop fighting this out in the media. It will only make matters worse. Clearly you must understand the importance of an artist ability to have copyright protection. Whether it is a photographer, a painter or sculptor, this is how artist's make their money to survive. If you have adapted a photo, then you are obligated to compensate the original artist. Of course it is much easier to do this in "advance" of its success. But now that the work is done, surely the Obama campaign has funds to offer a fair amount, that the AP would have accepted, had they been contacted for clearance in the first place. This ugliness is diluting the message of "Change". Stop digging in your heels on both sides and work this out. Fair is Fair!
As a professional photographer I completely support Shepard Fairey's argument in this case. What he did was REFERENCE the photo, it is not an exact replica and the poster is clearly done in Shepard's trademark artistic style. Artists reference other people's work, it's been that way for centuries, that's part of how we communicate and exchange ideas and it should not be considered illegal!
Re: "What he did was REFERENCE the photo."
I don't think that's correct. Referencing the photo would involve looking at it or recalling it and then creating an image that may be reminiscent or the original or some aspect of it. That involves the artist in the process: her/his vision and interpretation and a recreaation. The art history you're referring to involves students learning from masters - and masters learning from each other - by copying. Copying is the most extreme form of referencing - perhaps it's so extreme that to call it 'referencing' is misleading. In any case, none of what you're referring to involves a direct tracing of a mechanical reproduction, which is what Fairey did. (Yes, Warhol did it, but he used his own photographs.)
Indisputably, Fairey's work is valuable and artistic because of his vision and interpretation. In everyday language, it is clearly an original work. But the legal meaning of 'original' might be different. Personally, I don't have an opinion on whether Fairey did in fact violate copyright as the law currently stands. But the copyright law doesn't seem to me very clear, and the parts that are clear are often inconsistent. I hope this case and the publicity surrounding it leads to big changes so that visual and sound artists and writers and composers and architects can enjoy similar protections and freedoms.
Have you ever tried to trace a photo? Did it come out exactly as Shepard Fairey's did?
No? tracing is demonstrably an act of "interpretation and recreation." If it were not a process involving the personal vision of the artist, then all tracings of a work would be the same regardless of whose hand did the tracing.
this is not the case.
So this BLOG is censored. Fairness is not what Mathew Sheppard wants. He glorified the lord OBAMA then got notoriety himself on the way. OBAMA got a presidency and now is traveling the world like a movie star. He has no money for Mr. Sheppard!
This whole thing is a joke! The concept of fairness appears to mean fairness as long as you get the most.
Where is my last post! This BLOG is a farce.
Guess what youcensoredmypost your the egomaniac.
"Lord OBAMA" get over it.
Keep on fighting the good fight Sheppard. Thanks for the inspiration.
youcensoredmypost: Matthew Sheppard died because of horrible homophobic violence. Shepard Fairey is appropriately championing fair use. These are two completely separate issues.
What... What does Obama have to do with a copyright dispute?
He seems to be mentioned with or without any reasons.
The lawsuit was just a way to stir things up. its really a load of shite. AP uses lots of images that are copy righted and no one gives a damn. Keep going Shep!
it 'referencing' is misleading. In any case, none of what you're referring to involves a direct tracing of a mechanical reproduction, which is what Fairey did. (Yes, Warhol did it, but he used his own photographs.)
nursing degree | economic degree
Completely agree, and not just AP. Good Job, keep it up. Hopefully we will see the copyright laws tighten soon.
Psychic Reading | Free Psychic Reading
The picture of the alleged Herring artwork was used in an article where an authority on Herring's work said it was not by the artist. I believe that person is a relative of Herring, but I could be wrong.
with creative commons incensing issues,mass communications it makes it very hard to know what you can use for commercial works and what you can't.online education degree Still out right plagiarism is poor.
criminal justice degree
No doubt, Shepard Fairey has a strong, recognizable graphic style but he's a bit of a hypocrite with overly simple politics. He sells a lot of posters , excuse me, prints for profit and yet the content of many bash greed. For example, one poster pictures a dollar sign and the slogan This Is Your God. But I digress.
Shepard doesn't like other people profiting off his work. In other words he blasts people who sell his work on E-bay for profit. OK, that's fine if your not profiting off of other artist's work! Much of his graphic imagery is lifted directly from other retro posters, propaganda, photo's anything really.
I'm sure you are a nice guy Shepard. I like your taste in music at least, but get your philosophy straight.
Fight On for the Right of Creativity and All artists.
I'm not saying I disagree with Shepard's current stance(I certainly do not), but I do find it odd seeing as he filed a cease & desist order against Baxter Orr, in a similar situation.
It seems this is merely a guy trying to keep all the profit he's made from this picture and turning it around, because in this case (unlike the last), he is the little guy.
Fight On Indeed.
I didn't know about Baxter Orr, but now all I can say about Mr. Fairey is,
WHAT A HYPOCRIT!
Just lost the last shreds of street cred.
Um... just so everyone fully understands where Fairey is truly coming from:
http://www.art-for-a-change.com/Obey/index.htm
It's nauseating.
Sad to see the same haters posting they're usual stupid links trying to "educate" us but in the end nobody caring.
I read their posts sometimes.I wouldn`t call them haters
Too mild opinion. They are really hiding behind their monitors
Antiques Catalogue
Where the conversation is going?
You people sure have a lot of free time. Please get a bike and leave your basements where you blog and go out into the light of day and ride that bike for 9 or 10 miles. You will have less timeto play on the interwebnetand you will find out there is a whole world out there.
This is a valid point WOW! Yes it is good to have a bike and go for a long ride.
Blocked Arteries symptoms
Copyright, particularly on the internet is a rather big issue. I got into all sorts of trouble for using part of a shirt design as part of an illustration on my Free Vector Graphics site. It's hard to find a good definition, and with creative commons incensing issues, it makes it very hard to know what you can use for commercial works and what you can't. Still out right plagiarism is poor.
I don't really know what you're talking about.But you can't use the unclean hands defense/doctrine against staturory claim only against equitable claims and copyright is certainly statutory.Assicurazioni on line
If the hands are unclean, then it would be wise to engage in a little hand washing on a daily basis.
Post new comment