PDA

View Full Version : Change your Avatar FORD or you will get sued!



kwame k
02-04-2009, 08:33 PM
AP alleges copyright infringement of Obama image

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, 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 Manny 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 attorney, 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.

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.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090204/ap_en_ot/obama_poster)

LoungeMachine
02-04-2009, 08:35 PM
Just saw the [artist's] interview with Charlie Rose, and the Obama Campaign gave him the photo to use, and told him THEY owned the rights to it.

:gulp:

FORD
02-04-2009, 08:46 PM
Fuck the Assholiated Corporate Press. They should worry about reporting facts, and not making money from a fucking picture.

kwame k
02-04-2009, 08:52 PM
This is one of those....much ado about nothing......things......

GAR
02-04-2009, 09:48 PM
Fuck the Assholiated Corporate Press. They should worry about reporting facts, and not making money from a fucking picture.

Obama's been taking in tens of millions, not only in stickers and posters, but in hundred-thousand dollar billboards across the country with that plagiarised photo.

He's probably spent 100 million on advertising with that appealing Soviet-Era styled artwork.

When the AP provide copies of photos for "fair-use" publicity and journalism handouts, not only does that exclude marketable rights, but even when you do that you're supposed to tag the copywrite on it. Failure to do so then become a copywrite infringement issue, so there's a second problem to that.

Your boy's good at taking things that do not belong to him and we'll see just how he does in charge of the biggest "doesn't-belong-to-him" issue when he starts spending trillions of dollars that do not belong to the Taxpayer, leaving them in the lurch with double-digit trillions in debt. That's your boy: Defecit Obama.

kwame k
02-04-2009, 09:54 PM
Obama's been taking in tens of millions, not only in stickers and posters, but in hundred-thousand dollar billboards across the country.

He's probably spent 100 million on advertising with that appealing Soviet-Era styled artwork.

When the AP provide copies of photos for "fair-use" publicity and journalism handouts, not only does that exclude marketable rights, but even when you do that you're supposed to tag the copywrite on it.

Your boy's a blatant plagiarist. He's good at taking things that do not belong to him and we'll see just how he does in charge of the biggest "doesn't-belong-to-him" issue when he starts spending trillions of dollars that do not belong to the Taxpayer, leaving them in the lurch with double-digit trillions in debt. That's your boy: Defecit Obama.


Ah.....duh....racist....this isn't......Obama is not the one being sued......but be afraid, very afraid....the Mexicans are coming......the word on the street is that they may take away your rights to post at the libary........

GAR
02-04-2009, 09:57 PM
This is one of those....much ado about nothing......things......

So if somebody raises 600 million dollars, and sells maybe 50 million in merch with a photograph you took, you're okay with that?

You're obviously not a professional photographer: at the end of this is a real live person who's just eating the shit out of life because his employer fucked him over till it was too late. And now that he wants it stopped, you think this is a little issue, you're very wrong.

kwame k
02-04-2009, 10:04 PM
So if somebody raises 600 million dollars, and sells maybe 50 million in merch with a photograph you took, you're okay with that?

You're obviously not a professional photographer: at the end of this is a real live person who's just eating the shit out of life because his employer fucked him over till it was too late. And now that he wants it stopped, you think this is a little issue, you're very wrong.

Nice deflection......racist.....refer to this post.....by you


Obama's been taking in tens of millions, not only in stickers and posters, but in hundred-thousand dollar billboards across the country with that plagiarised photo.

He's probably spent 100 million on advertising with that appealing Soviet-Era styled artwork.

Your boy's good at taking things that do not belong to him and we'll see just how he does in charge of the biggest "doesn't-belong-to-him" issue when he starts spending trillions of dollars that do not belong to the Taxpayer, leaving them in the lurch with double-digit trillions in debt. That's your boy: Defecit Obama.

again....Obama's not the issue........hey, I hear the library is having a debate class.....sign up......

ELVIS
02-04-2009, 10:12 PM
Are you cslling Gar a racist based on his contribution to this thread or past efforts ??

jhale667
02-04-2009, 10:13 PM
Your boy....


Your PRESIDENT, Bitch.
:biggrin:

GAR
02-04-2009, 10:27 PM
THE president.

GAR
02-04-2009, 10:28 PM
Nice deflection......racist.....refer to this post....

Nice bait, Rat!

Didn't really work.

kwame k
02-04-2009, 10:35 PM
Are you cslling Gar a racist based on his contribution to this thread or past efforts ??


Oh...I don't know maybe the content of all his political posts.....

kwame k
02-04-2009, 10:40 PM
Nice bait, Rat!

Didn't really work.

I agree....you had a bullshit comeback based on nothing......grab the Librarian and ask her what comprehension means........ramblining off about 600 million and such.....while she's trying explain comprehension.......ask her what that there big word context means......

jhale667
02-05-2009, 12:21 AM
THE president.

Exactly. Much like Repukes reminded everyone for the last eight years - same difference. Deal with it. :tongue0011:

hideyoursheep
02-05-2009, 04:13 AM
Didn't really work.


That's why illegals took your 'yob'.

hideyoursheep
02-05-2009, 04:14 AM
I agree....you had a bullshit comeback based on nothing......grab the Librarian and ask her what comprehension means........ramblining off about 600 million and such.....while she's trying explain comprehension.......ask her what that there big word context means......

Or he could open one of the books on the shelf while he waits for the guy in fromt of him to log off of Facebook.:biggrin:

Nickdfresh
02-05-2009, 09:10 AM
Hysterical! The AP is actually claiming they own somebody's image? Good one!

The can't even fucking stop GoogleAP! :biggrin:

GAR
02-05-2009, 02:02 PM
That's why illegals took your 'yob'.

To be more specific, constantly branding me Racist since debating Obama as unqualified and backed by a rogue's gallery of Clintonite losers isn't going to motivate me to defend the baseless absurdity.

But with repetition of doing that, you'll cement my notions of you three as an Unholy Trio of Mental Defects.

I'll probably stop replying at that point, and select Hide Usernames so I'm not distracted by screen pollution of your text's noise.

GAR
02-05-2009, 02:18 PM
Hysterical! The AP is actually claiming they own somebody's image?

Unless Obama took the picture himself, he doesn't own the rights.

Let's drop it down a notch to your 3rd grade level of understanding: Peter Parker takes a photo of Spiderman and tries to sell it. JJonah Jameson says "You can't sell a photo of Spiderman, it belongs to everybody" and throws him out.

This scenario never happened because we have what's called a "copy-write". That means, the man who took the picture owns the right to reproduce it.

Now then children, can anyone tell me what would you do if a man running for President asked you to loan your photograph of him? You would let him use it wouldn't you, because publicity pictures are the best pictures, and people will see your work as the Best Work.

But what happens when that person takes your Best Work and suddenly starts to sell your Best Work? Is that fair kids, nooo-o-o-oo, of course it's not fair. That's not his Best Work to sell when you loaned it to be used only for promoting and campaigning.

Children can you now tell me what the value of your Best Work is when you try to sell it, and it's already flooded in the marketplace: slathered on lapel buttons for $5.95, bumper stickers sold for $12.95 or three for $20.00 or made into posters for $29.99?

That's right kids, your Best Work is now your Worst Work because you can't make one dollar from it. That's called "plagiarism" and the damages to your Best Work are called "distress" because the value to it has been sucked like a vaccum from your pocket, into the new President's pocket.

And that's not fair.

GAR
02-05-2009, 02:30 PM
This things' going to be in litigation for ten years. The AP and the photographer need to find out how much money's been made, then ask for 75% and settle for a half and that's alot of prelims for findings, attempts to dismiss, and further clownings on both parts to embarass the other party.

Obama the fuckin' Lawyerball Player will take it to jury trial, where he stands a good chance of his winning smile bulldozing the protected right we take for granted everyday of the year, some live their whole lives off it.

But if he loses, he could face treble damage penalties for unfair profit at the expense of the infringement, then thru several courts of appeal only to reduce the awarded amount by 80 cents on the dollar, a far worser scenario based on an equal 50-50 division of poster and buttons bullshit sales.

I think he'll try the first two years to placate the AP with promises of future sweet access against the threats of cutting them out of White House briefings completely, at which case a burned AP will go very very negative and conservative. OR the AP will settle for 2 cents on a supplied dollar-figure given for the sake of the photographer and lesser guarantees of special access.

But the media gets access anyways! I can't believe this guy's dick isn't photographed going to the bathroom, he's shadowed so much.

LoungeMachine
02-05-2009, 03:43 PM
we have what's called a "copy-write". That means, the man who took the picture owns the right to reproduce it.

.

No moron, you mean a copyright

The mere fact you put it into quotes though cracks me the fuck up

:lol:

It's much easier to be condescending when you know what the fuck you're even talking about, LibraryBoy.

:gulp:

GAR
02-05-2009, 04:16 PM
By attacking the spelling and not the point made I must assume you fully agree.

LoungeMachine
02-05-2009, 04:31 PM
By attacking the spelling and not the point made I must assume you fully agree.

This isn't a "spelling" issue, mensa.


I'm attacking you for being such an unmitigated douche bag.

You get on your high horse, and talk down to people in your condescending way, with your air quotes and "now then children" bullshit, coupled with your Spiderman analogy, only to not even know the correct term

My advice? Stay in the library. You could use some book learnin'.

idiot.

:gulp:

GAR
02-05-2009, 05:20 PM
I apologize for "speaking" in such a way as if one were to address an unmitigated clit.

<a href="http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=47993858">Breakdancer Meets Ball</a><br/><object width="425px" height="360px" ><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"/><param name="movie" value="http://mediaservices.myspace.com/services/media/embed.aspx/m=47993858,t=1,mt=video"/><embed src="http://mediaservices.myspace.com/services/media/embed.aspx/m=47993858,t=1,mt=video" width="425" height="360" allowFullScreen="true" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object>

I was sure you could figure out the "big words" but I wasn't certain you could put the whole thought together. Forgive me.