AP Accuses Obama Artist Shepard Fairey Of Copyright Infringement

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - AP Accuses Obama Artist Shepard Fairey Of Copyright Infringement stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

HILLEL ITALIE | 02/ 4/09 10:39 PM | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
A poster of President Barack Obama, right, by artist Shepard Fairey is shown for comparison with this April 27, 2006 file photo of then-Sen. Barack Obama by Associated Press photographer Mannie Garcia at the National Press Club in Washington. Fairey has acknowledged, the poster is based on the AP photograph. (AP Photo/Mannie Garcia/ Shepard Fairey)

NEW YORK — 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, and 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 Mannie 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. "AP safeguards its assets and looks at these events on a case-by-case basis. We have reached out to Mr. Fairey's attorney and are in discussions. We hope for an amicable solution."

"We believe fair use protects Shepard's right to do what he did here," says Fairey's lawyer, Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project at Stanford University and a lecturer at the Stanford Law School. "It wouldn't be appropriate to comment beyond that at this time because we are in discussions about this with the AP."

Fair use is a legal concept that allows exceptions to copyright law, based on, among other factors, how much of the original is used, what the new work is used for and how the original is affected by the new work.

Legal experts offered differing views on the Obama image.

Story continues below
advertisement

Jane Ginsburg, a Columbia University law professor who specializes in copyright cases, questioned whether Fairey has a valid fair-use claim and says that he should have at least credited the AP.

"What makes me uneasy is that it kind of suggests that anybody's photograph is fair game, even if it uses the entire image, and it remains recognizable, and it's not just used in a collage," Ginsburg said. "I think that's pretty radical."

Robin Gross, an intellectual property attorney who heads IP Justice, an international civil liberties organization, believes that Fairey had the right to use the photo, saying that he intended it for a political cause, not commercial use.

"Fairey's purpose of the use for the photo was political or civic, and this will certainly count in favor of the poster being a fair use," said Gross, based in San Francisco. "Nor will the poster diminish the value of the photo, if anything, it has increased the original photo's value beyond measure, another factor counting heavily in favor of fair use."

A longtime rebel with a history of breaking rules, Fairey has said he found the photograph using Google Images. He released the image on his Web site shortly after he created it, in early 2008, and made thousands of posters for the street.

As it caught on, supporters began downloading the image and distributing it at campaign events, while blogs and other Internet sites picked it up. Fairey has said that he did not receive any of the money raised.

A former Obama campaign official said they were well aware of the image based on the picture taken by Garcia, a temporary hire no longer with the AP, but never licensed it or used it officially. The Obama official asked not to be identified because no one was authorized anymore to speak on behalf of the campaign.

The image's fame did not end with the election.

It will be included this month at a Fairey exhibit at the Institute of Contemporary Art in Boston and a mixed-media stenciled collage version has been added to the permanent collection of the National Portrait Gallery in Washington.

"The continued use of the poster, regardless of whether it is for galleries or other distribution, is part of the discussion AP is having with Mr. Fairey's representative," Colford said.

A New York Times book on the election, just published by Penguin Group (USA), includes the image. A Vermont-based publisher, Chelsea Green, also used it _ credited solely to Fairey_ as the cover for Robert Kuttner's "Obama's Challenge," an economic manifesto released in September. Chelsea Green President Margo Baldwin said that Fairey did not ask for money, only that the publisher make a donation to the National Endowment for the Arts.

"It's a wonderful piece of art, but I wish he had been more careful about the licensing of it," said Baldwin, who added that Chelsea Green gave $2,500 to the NEA.

Fairey also used the AP photograph for an image designed specially for the Obama inaugural committee, which charged anywhere from $100 for a poster to $500 for a poster signed by the artist.

Fairey has said that he first designed the image a year ago after he was encouraged by the Obama campaign to come up with some kind of artwork. Last spring, he showed a letter to The Washington Post that came from the candidate.

"Dear Shepard," the letter reads. "I would like to thank you for using your talent in support of my campaign. The political messages involved in your work have encouraged Americans to believe they can help change the status quo. Your images have a profound effect on people, whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign."

At first, Obama's team just encouraged him to make an image, Fairey has said. But soon after he created it, a worker involved in the campaign asked if Fairey could make an image from a photo to which the campaign had rights.

"I donated an image to them, which they used. It was the one that said "Change" underneath it. And then later on I did another one that said "Vote" underneath it, that had Obama smiling," he said in a December 2008 interview with an underground photography Web site.

___

Associated Press writer Philip Elliott in Washington contributed to this report.

NEW YORK — 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 Warhole...
NEW YORK — 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 Warhole...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
532
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next › Last » (15 pages total)
- sf girl I'm a Fan of sf girl 10 fans permalink

They're just mad because he turned their photo into a work of art.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:06 PM on 02/05/2009
- raptor I'm a Fan of raptor 7 fans permalink

Photograph is not art --Gertrude Sten

Actually, she said that art is about what's important, photography isn't..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:32 PM on 02/05/2009
- raptor I'm a Fan of raptor 7 fans permalink

Stein, not Sten. Need more coffee.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:36 PM on 02/05/2009
- cordyc I'm a Fan of cordyc 20 fans permalink

Isn't their another photo at the same angle of O in a suit and tie that someone else claims as the basis for the Fairy work? Given that it's more of a drawing than a photo I don't see how any can claim that it's from their photo.

I'm a photographer but I don't make claims on any copyright to Obama's face. Given that easily a million photos of the man must exist by now I don't see the claim.

I want strong copyright laws to protect my work, but I don't claim any face as mine.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:06 PM on 02/05/2009
photo

fairey admitted he took the photo off the internet, what more do you want as proof he stole it?

the copyright is notof obama's face. please if you really are a photographer, get a better grasp of the issue.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:12 PM on 02/05/2009
- BassMonk I'm a Fan of BassMonk 6 fans permalink

How do campaign posters compete with a magazine? AP's case sounds very weak.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:19 PM on 02/05/2009
- OverIt I'm a Fan of OverIt 76 fans permalink

Follow your own advice. Basing a work of art on an existing work does not necessarily mean you "stole" it. Get a better grasp of the two following concepts: fair use and transformative use.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:19 PM on 02/05/2009
- Oilygarch I'm a Fan of Oilygarch 5 fans permalink
photo

Hey! He credited The Internet!!!

Fairey, please mail your check to Al Gore!

Oh, I heard David Letterman say that the past few days it's been so so so cold that people were starting to throw shoes at Al Gore!!!

LOL

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:41 PM on 02/05/2009

Here is the reference photo that was used. As you can see, it's a dead-on match.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v664/Shtick/Fairey-HopeOriginalcopy.jpg

That is the Mannie Garcia photo.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:11 PM on 02/05/2009
- OverIt I'm a Fan of OverIt 76 fans permalink

The Supreme Cout on TRANSFORMATIVE USE --- from case involving 2LiveCrew Sample of Roy Orbison's "Pretty Woman":

"I believe the answer to the question of justification turns primarily on whether, and to what extent, the challenged use is transformative. The use must be productive and must employ the quoted matter in a different manner or for a different purpose from the original. ...[If] the secondary use adds value to the original--if the quoted matter is used as raw material, transformed in the creation of new information, new aesthetics, new insights and understand­ings--this is the very type of activity that the fair use doctrine intends to protect for the enrichment of society.

Transformative uses may include criticizing the quoted work, exposing the character of the original author, proving a fact, or summarizing an idea argued in the original in order to defend or rebut it. They also may include parody, symbolism, aesthetic declarations, and innumerable other uses. "

IN CASE YOU'RE WONDERING, 2LIVECREW WON.
.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:01 PM on 02/05/2009
- emily00011 I'm a Fan of emily00011 33 fans permalink

seems like it wouldn't be hard to say the artist add aesthetics and new insights to the original photo. The painting makes you stop and ponder it for a moment, the photo is just another photo. The artist definitely made his own interpretation of it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:46 PM on 02/05/2009

Sure and Campbell Soup owns the rights to Andy Warhol's soup can classics? Anybody seen a take off on "I (heart) NY"? Or, "(fill in the blank) Is For Lovers"? Or, "Got Milk?" ? Go for it AP, but you just look like a bunch of whiney saps.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:56 PM on 02/05/2009

If he is making money on it the AP photographer should be getting a share.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:50 PM on 02/05/2009
- OverIt I'm a Fan of OverIt 76 fans permalink

That's not the legal standard. Fair Use is alive and well, whether one likes it or not. It's a fact of life in IP.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:03 PM on 02/05/2009

He isn't making any money from it. If I remember correctly from the Colbert Report (or Daily Show) he said he did it for free for the campaign, and hasn't collected any money.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:12 PM on 02/05/2009
- Oilygarch I'm a Fan of Oilygarch 5 fans permalink
photo

And Ollie North never made a dime from the blind eye he gave the d0pe that went to Eglin AFB, or the arms that were diverted from the drvg-run and sold to Iran .

But now good ol' Ollie sure does command a pretty penny for his speech circuit appearances.

But he really should have credited the still gainfully employed Negroponte for his success in nothing sticking, and for having become the most powerful Lieutenant Colonel in the history of human-kind.

Oh, hi Ollie! Back when I was a whipper-snapper at Palmerola, I donated my boots to your cause. Can I have them back now? LOL

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:57 PM on 02/05/2009
- Mike169 I'm a Fan of Mike169 46 fans permalink
photo

Would AP or the photographer get the money? I'll bet copyright is AP's.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:13 PM on 02/05/2009
- Oilygarch I'm a Fan of Oilygarch 5 fans permalink
photo

I bet your bet is right! And if we both win out bets, will AP sue us?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:45 PM on 02/05/2009

AP would get the money. They are the ones filing suit. Mr. Garcia was on assignment for them at the time, so they "own" the rights to his work.

Mr. Garcia has stated that he isn't after money here. This is purely an AP thing. All he wants is a signed poster. I'd say that's fair!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:45 PM on 02/06/2009
- kburlz I'm a Fan of kburlz 23 fans permalink

A monkey can take a picture.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:16 PM on 02/05/2009
- Oilygarch I'm a Fan of Oilygarch 5 fans permalink
photo

I know a monkey. And with all due repect, Manny Garcia is no monkey!!

Manny, give us a shout-out if you're unemployed. This is Miguel Palacio from KPIK.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:44 PM on 02/05/2009

Maybe a monkee can. But can you?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 PM on 02/11/2009

Having been an AP photographer nearly 40 (!!!) years ago I'm just baffled at AP's position.
There were substantial changes that -- to me at least -- clearly place the image within fair use.
If I'd been AP and the photographer I would have been *very* pleased and taken the credit and been satisfied to share the 15 minute spotlight.
Seriously, how many AP photos do you think have legs for more than one 24 hr news cycle? Very, very few.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:38 PM on 02/05/2009
- Daughter I'm a Fan of Daughter 2 fans permalink

Great perspective! Thank you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:28 PM on 02/05/2009

If Obama lost the election, would they even be talking about this?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:37 PM on 02/05/2009
photo

Oh C'mon.... it's not an exact replica of the photograph with color changes like Warhol used to do...

Is the AP saying that they have "copyrighted" that expression whenever Obama makes it? I have no respect for the AP after this. Their job is to report the news, not copyright the President's facial expressions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:35 PM on 02/05/2009

Does anyone know whether Warhol ever had to pay for the use of the photos that were the basis of his silk screen images? Yes, Campbell's soup might have put up some kind of stink at some point, but the argument can be made that in that case, they had some justification.

The adverserial position taken up by AP and Mannie Garcia makes me think that they must have some hardcore Repubicans in their ranks who can't resist digging in for one more last and distractionary stand. That might be the real lesson here for Fairey: filch and fetch future images only from politically friendly sources.

It's obvious to all that Fairey has, arguably, come up with the only image of a public figure yet to match, in terms of popularity on the street, that of the Korda photo of Che. It remains to be seen whether it will survive the test of time. Yet to achieve iconic stature in such a short time is already remarkable. It became an instant classic.

AP, over time, will eventually realize that it is on the wrong side of history: the image now belongs to the people of this country and the public record of their legitimate fight to retrieve the government and constitution for the purposes for which both were founded from the hands of misguided bush admin..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:14 PM on 02/05/2009
- Oilygarch I'm a Fan of Oilygarch 5 fans permalink
photo

Speaking of the attempted copyright of iconic expression­s...

What about

http://www.nobeliefs.com/politics/BushChimp.jpg

???

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:04 PM on 02/05/2009
photo

I can freely excerpt text from any AP article, in any op-ed. Why should a picture be different? Are we taking the expression "worth a thousand words" to be legally meaningful, now?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:33 PM on 02/05/2009
- Oilygarch I'm a Fan of Oilygarch 5 fans permalink
photo

IMHO, the expressions in the above blog entry are worth a million words.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:05 PM on 02/05/2009
photo

Fairy's interpretation of that photo is obviously protected by Fair Use. The AP's entire business is based on verbatim copying of its articles, text and images, by thousands (hundreds, now?) of local newspapers worldwide. Now, they are asserting a right to greater control over use of one image, for a use not anticipated in their business model, than they ever attempt to exercise for uses that are anticipated in their business model. It is a preposterous assertion and they should be laughed out of court.

[
"What makes me uneasy is that it kind of suggests that anybody's photograph is fair game, even if it uses the entire image, and it remains recognizable, and it's not just used in a collage," Ginsburg said. "I think that's pretty radical."
]

Just had to use the word "radical" eh, Ginsburg? The recession is affecting "intellectual property" lawyers too, then. Good.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:31 PM on 02/05/2009
photo

I can't believe the AP actually has a case here. If Fairey had cut and paste the AP picture onto his canvas then filled in the background, I might be able to understand the grounds for the copyright infringement, but this just makes no sense to me.

The lesson actually comes at a perfect time for me as I was recently hired by the Humane Society of the United States to do a horse care video series and had planned on using the anatomy images from veterinary text books as the models for my own drawings.

I don't know much about the legal argument, but it seems that if Fairey actually did violate copyright laws, his "theft" is minor compared to my own. Of course, exposure is the real issue here, and even though my work is good, I highly doubt my horse care video series will become a national emblem any time soon. In truth, I could probably get away with pulling the images directly from the vet books, but it'd be a pointless risk, especially with the existence of clipart and other public domain images.

Still, I'm curious to know if I would actually be committing copyright infringement by using an image from a textbook as the basic model for my own drawing of the equine skeletal structure and digestive system. Anyone know? And where can I find a book that breaks down copyright laws so that the general reader can understand what is and isn't kosher?

Thanks!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:30 PM on 02/05/2009

The AP is missing an opportunity to get credit for the orginal photo and promote the use of its work on the web. Instead of suing for compensation, they can just work out a deal to get credit and a link from fairey's web site. Old media is going to come to an end even faster if they use the sledgehammer of the courts instead of the tools of the new technology.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:08 PM on 02/05/2009
photo

Oh F#$@ this S#$% f#$ing copyright law motherf#$@ers

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:57 PM on 02/05/2009
- deeppeace I'm a Fan of deeppeace 53 fans permalink
photo

Don't hold back! Tell us how you really feel!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:10 PM on 02/05/2009
- Oilygarch I'm a Fan of Oilygarch 5 fans permalink
photo

ROFL!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:07 PM on 02/05/2009
photo

The AP are being a little too aggressive with no real footing like they were when they started attacking bloggers last year. They will back off and "rethink" the terms of fair use and Fairey use.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:22 PM on 02/05/2009
- Oilygarch I'm a Fan of Oilygarch 5 fans permalink
photo

IMHO, you are being way too kind dear sir/ma'am.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:08 PM on 02/05/2009
- NelsonC I'm a Fan of NelsonC 12 fans permalink

Legally, the AP may have a point. But it just underscores the lunacy of our copyright and "intellectual property" laws.
Can the makers of the tie Obama was wearing, sue for using an image of their product without consent? And what about that flag in the background? Was it's use in that photo cleared by the estate of Betsy Ross?
And the guy who did the lighting at the event where Obama was photographed; Shouldn't he get some credit for such perfect shading?
Then there's inventor of photography Nicéphore Niépce. Where's his credit?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:21 PM on 02/05/2009
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next › Last » (15 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect