Los Angeles street artist Shepard Fairey with his Barack Obama Hope artwork in Los Angeles. Fairey is the designer of the famous Obama campaign poster, the one which AP contends has infringed on its copyright. (Let's make this clear: This photo by Damian Dovarganes comes from AP)
by Mark Silva
We reported here, the other day, about the Obama White House's concern about copyright infringement in the exuberant proliferation of all things Obama.
But someone else has some copyright concerns as well: The Associated Press, owner of the image that a certain artist has popularized.
The pensive Obama facing upward, forward, onward and futureward, with that Warholesque red, white and blue and the word, HOPE, is the work of Shepard Fairey, a Los-Angeles based street artist.
It has driven the sales of hundreds of thousands of posters and stickers, with Fairey-signed copies fetching thousands of dollars on eBay.
It is based, Fairey has acknowledged, on an Associated Press photograph, taken in April 2006 by Manny Garcia at the National Press Club in Washington.
The AP is asking for credit -- and compensation.
The artist begs to differ.
And the AP provided this report.
Comments
We demand partial government ownership. Americans have invested (at least 54%) in Obama. His image would be worth squat without the voters. Cap their profits and wages. Stop obscene profiteering by money hungry private enterprise. Lefties unite!
Posted by: Bubba Porter | February 4, 2009 6:02 PM
I think the artist is in the right, as artistic subject matter is not covered with any "rights". The act of an artist painting something makes it an original piece. I'd be curious to hear what John W says on this one.
Posted by: Xcellentform | February 4, 2009 6:21 PM
People should be allowed to lie, cheat and steal from others because any gov'ment regulation is socialism.
Posted by: Blubber Snorter | February 4, 2009 9:45 PM
X,
Careful what you wish for. It might be John Windbag's day off.
Posted by: Jeff | February 4, 2009 10:19 PM
While the artistic value of Fairey's work is clear, it is not as thought he imagined the image of Obama or pulled from some common public image. He copied it from Garcia's photo and the descent think to do would be to give Garcia a little more credit for capturing such a strong image of Obama. More than credit, a few percent of the financial reward would be nice, too. Not to do so makes Fairey seem greedy, and take away from the message piled upon the image.
Unless, maybe it was meant to be ironic.
Posted by: PJ Hansen | February 5, 2009 10:14 AM
* * * * *
Posted by: Xcellentform | February 4, 2009 6:21 PM
.
I can’t comment on the issue. Copyright law is a complicated and specialized area of the law with which I have little familiarity.
Posted by: John W. | February 5, 2009 3:03 PM
The photographer's job was to capture the moment and character of the subject, Obama and present it the way he intended it to.
The artist TOOK that photo and manipulated it but kept the same moment and character the photographer intended to. It's like taking a printed article and copying it and then changing the colors of the font and text and then passing it off as an original.
The photographer should get credit and compensation and as an artist Shepard Fairey should know if someone took HIS original work, changed the colors then passed it on as an original that it's the right thing to give credit where its due especially if it was his work ORIGINALLY where it came from.
Posted by: Antonio | February 5, 2009 4:24 PM
Art means different things to different people. To me, the shadowy red symbolizes the approaching of Communism under Obama.
Posted by: bill | February 5, 2009 4:42 PM
Well, actually, the ownership of Obama and his likeness really is Obama's.
Posted by: MDV | February 5, 2009 5:44 PM
Ummmmmm. I do believe that Mr. Fairey is doing what Obama campaigned on. Take from the rich and give to the poor. Last I checked a street artist wasn't that high on the Forbes list. So he's "taking" what is his, and no you don't have to give credit where it's due. The potog could have photo shopped it and made his own colors. It's the creative mind.
Posted by: Pella Cholla | February 5, 2009 6:31 PM
* * * * *
Posted by: bill | February 5, 2009 4:42 PM
.
I don't think its the red tint that signals the coming communism. It's the "socialist realism" style of the pose that does it for me.
Posted by: John W. | February 5, 2009 9:04 PM
What a few of the comments before me have missed is that the original photographer won't receive anything from this lawsuit.
Garcia no longer works for AP and the photo was taken under a work for hire agreement which means he gives ownership of all images he takes to the company he's working for - In this case AP.
Posted by: Rachel Soma | February 8, 2009 8:21 PM