Skip to comments.Associated Press sues retailers over iconic Obama image
Posted on 03/12/2011 4:29:14 AM PST by csvset
The Associated Press has sued several retailers including Urban Outfitters for the unauthorised use of the Hope image created by artist Shepard Fairey. Artist Fairey used an AP photo without permission to create the image, and was sued by the news agency for violating copyright.
That case was settled. AP argues that using the image on T-shirts is wilful and blatant violation of the copyright of the photo.
A spokesman said that using photos for free devalued the work of journalists.
The news agency filed lawsuits against Urban Outfitters, Nordstrom and Zumiez seeking unspecified damages.
A Nordstrom spokeswoman said in a statement that the firm was aware of the lawsuit. Representatives of the other retailers have yet to respond, AP said.
In a statement, AP spokesman Paul Colford said: "When a commercial entity such as these retailers, or the company that sold the shirts to them, gets something for nothing by using an AP photo without credit or compensation, it undermines the AP's ability to cover the news. "It devalues the work that our journalists do, often in dangerous locations where they may literally risk life and limb to cover a story."
Iconic image Street artist Fairey used the photo, taken by Mannie Garcia in 2006, when he created his Hope artwork during Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign. Fairey sued AP in 2009, seeking a declaration he had not violated its copyright with his iconic image. AP then counter-sued, saying he had done so through his uncredited and uncompensated use of its picture.
The deal agreed in January called for both sides to work together with the image and share future rights to merchandise based on it.
As part of the deal, Fairey agreed not to use another AP photo in his work without first obtaining a licence.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
That sounds like a lousy decision to me. When an artist uses a photo as the basis of a piece of art it is no different than painting a landscape. It is only a representation of something.
"What would the world be without me?"
That’s original work ~
That still seems to me like a substantial alteration. It’s not like he was selling copies of the pic. No one would look at the photo and the poster and consider them to be the same thing.
I don’t remember Nordstrom’s selling Bush shirts yet they sold Obama ‘Hope’ shirts. Won’t shop there anymore.
What is the original work? I don’t know what you are referring to.
There is such a thing as a "derivative" work. This clearly falls into that category. Anyone looking at the two can clearly see that one is based on the other. A derivative work is covered by copyright law.
A lousy law IMO.
They have undermined their credibility all by themselves.
Someone making a buck off and image they created and continue to perpetuate, somehow impairs their ability to prop up that POS. That's what the issue really is
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.