But there is an important exception that journalists, in particular, need to know about. This exception to the general copyright rule is known as the Fair Use Doctrine. It allows the use of limited amounts of copyrighted works for important purposes like news reporting, critiques and education -- as long as the fair use does not significantly cut into the commercial value of the original copyrighted work.
So, for example, it's permissible for a student newspaper to reprint a short passage from a new book to accompany a book review, or to include sample lyrics from a new album to accompany an album review. Or it's generally considered acceptable to reprint a small photo of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, but it probably would not be considered acceptable to reproduce that photo to a very large size for greater impact.
There are four key factors that determine fair use:
1) The purpose of your use (Is your purpose for using the item for teaching or news reporting? Or to make money off of it?)
2) The nature of your work (Is the work itself factual or highly creative like someone's copyrighted fiction. The more creative and original the work is, the more necessary it is to be sure you're only using a tiny amount for the purpose of critiquing, for example.)
3) The amount you're using (A small quantity of the original work is usually acceptable.)
4) The effect of your use on the market (Your use of this item will have no major effect on the market.)
Still, what constitutes "fair use" isn't always clear. Click here to read an interesting article about a copyright legal battle revolving around President Obama's image.
Flickr Creative Commons image by MikeBlogs
I don't think the AP has any lawful claim on Fairey's art. After all, Fairey found AP's picture on Google and it's not like he took a photo of it; it simply inspired him to create an original piece of artwork.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Christina. Another thing that should be taken into consideration is that the image taken by the AP was not exactly one of a kind-there haven been countless photos taken of the President. The photo in question was not in any ways distinct or unique from the others, and the art cold easily have been based off of observations of the President.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the AP does have a legitimate claim towards some of the proceeds from the millions of posters, stickers, buttons and so on that were sold. The piece of art uses the copyrighted photo as a template for his entire piece. Had he used a different photo, the picture would look much different. Just look at the two pictures- the tilt of the head is the same, the look in the eyes is the same. Even the lines on the face are the exact same; it is a copy of the same photo, albeit artistically modified. The two pictures are far too similar to dismiss as fair use. The fair use doctrine says that you can use a portion of someone else's work- but you can't take someone else picture, paint it, add the word hope and call it entirely yours. Also, Fairey did not do this for a news reporting or an educational purpose; he has personally benefitted and made money from it. He sold copies of the art; it is even featured in his new display and has undoubtedly given a huge boost to the artist's career. Because of these reasons, i don't think fair use is an adequate defense for Fairey.
ReplyDeleteI think that the AP is correct. Fairey's artwork has had such an impact on the market (one of the 4 things that determine fair use). He has sold so many photos and pictures of this image based on an original copy that wasn't his. He has made a product that so many people are buying. There is no reason why this case wouldn't benefit the AP.
ReplyDeleteAlso I didn't know that plagarism wasn't a national law, only an education law.
Because Fairey did not get permission to use this photo, he went against the copyright laws. I understand the point made by Christina and Mary Kate above. However, he based his artwork on that photo and needed permission to use it. It does not fall under fair use for the reason that the picture has circulated rapidly and is commonly known to the public.
ReplyDeleteI can see both sides of the story. I can see Fairey’s side because he found the photo on Google. Secondly, he used his own artistic take on the picture. But I see AP’s side of the story as well because he did not really use the picture for an educational or newsworthy cause and because I had a he effect on the market. Someone made a lot of money off of this idea and the picture is now being used in Fairey’s art exhibit. So, there are different issues that support each side of the story.
ReplyDeleteI think that Fairey has fair use over the photo. With so many pictures of Obama and him drawing inspiration from one, I think that the AP has no case. He drew the picture that he found on Google and he got lucky with it being a success. The AP is just upset that they do not get to profit out of it. However, it is Fairey's design.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the AP had a claim over the artwork of Fairey, he drew the picture himself. That would be like me drawing a picture of a snowman a little kid made, and them saying they own my picture because it was their snowman, it makes no sense
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting subject. I believe that the artwork is an interpretation of the photograph, not a copy of it. In the same way that a painting of a tree is not a use of the tree, just an interpretation of the tree. A piece of art inspired by the tree, just like this where the artwork was inspired by the photograph. These situations must be looked at carefully. It is important to respect other people's work and give them credit.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the rules of copyright. It makes sense that people shouldn't be able to use someone else's creative works for a profit. I think that in the legal battle involving President Obama's picture being used to create a new logo may have started out as fair use with good nature intended,and just turned into something bigger because of it's rising popularity. The artist,Shepard Fairey, should offer compensation to Manny Garcia because he used such a large portion of it and received a profit from her picture.
ReplyDeleteI think that AP deserves some credit for the drawing. I do not think that this was fair use because it came so popular. I think that the artist should offer to share any profits made with the original photographer. I believe that AP deserves something for this image.
ReplyDelete