Copyrights and art
There are times when I think the copyright laws are too stringent. I'm reading about Shepard Fairey's
use of an AP photo to create the Obama poster. Yes, Fairey shouldn't have lied, but clearly he does convert the photo into an entirely new work of art, so AP should have never tried to claim his profits for the work in the first place. Art is not like mechanical inventions: the rules for copyright have to be more flexible than the rules for technology. Did Campbell Soup sue Warhol for using their cans in his artwork? Did the producers of the publicity still of Marilyn Monroe go after him for copyright infringement? Even if Fairey did use the AP photo to create his poster, he is working in a tradition of American art that should have the right to re-create images.
use of an AP photo to create the Obama poster. Yes, Fairey shouldn't have lied, but clearly he does convert the photo into an entirely new work of art, so AP should have never tried to claim his profits for the work in the first place. Art is not like mechanical inventions: the rules for copyright have to be more flexible than the rules for technology. Did Campbell Soup sue Warhol for using their cans in his artwork? Did the producers of the publicity still of Marilyn Monroe go after him for copyright infringement? Even if Fairey did use the AP photo to create his poster, he is working in a tradition of American art that should have the right to re-create images.