Art Versus Copyright Law Continued…

In the most recent high-profile example of art vs. copyright, famed street artist and fellow designer, Shepard Fairey is catching hell from the Associated Press over a photo of Barack Obama. The AP alleges that Fairey’s ubiquitous ‘Hope’ poster infringes upon their copyrights for the photograph on which the poster was based.

Fairey, who rose to fame with his guerilla street art featuring a simplified likeness of Andre The Giant, has developed a signature style based around illustration techniques gleaned from silk screening and woodcutting. The Hope poster was likely created using these techniques, with the photo serving as a guide for recreating the pose, lighting, and likeness of Obama.

Strangely, the AP has known the source of Fairey’s inspiration for nearly a year without addressing the issue of copyright. And museums in Boston and Washington, DC have found the poster’s originality to be sufficient to justify its installation. So why this is coming to life now, I’m not sure.

As a designer, I’ve used a similar approach countless times. (And I’m sure I’m not alone.) The difference is that I’ve never used a photo of such a recognizable subject. (And that the resulting artwork has never become the phenomenon that is the ‘Hope’ poster.) If I find a picture on Google and use it as a model for illustrating mountains to be used in an animation, chances are not great that anyone will be able to recognize it as such. But should I feel compelled to replace those mountains with the image of the 44th, I’ll think twice first.

Also:

An interesting critique of Fairey. I’ve been talking about the ethics of the ‘grey area’ of inspiration vs. plagarism, but it seems that at times Fairey has gone outside those lines to make artwork that can perhaps be seen in more black and white terms.

A New York Times article (from the article linked to above) about the issue.