Comments on: Famous Obama ‘Hope’ Image Stolen?

By: Anon

Anon — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 02:35:03 +0000

Yes he steals, yes he made a ton of dough off it by selling limited editioned silkscreens but copyright is dead and no one can stop it.

People have stolen from beginning of time, be it language or stories (biblical).. art etc. As long as there are people, things will be stolen and be mutated into something else, something even better.

When it’s good, people won’t mind it, like this photographer, he was flattered and he won’t sue. It’s called progress. Enjoy it you no talent hacks.

Oh, and yes, it was an easy vector trace but art is not about degrees of hardships. It’s about the msg and this image, like it or not spoke to the masses, in a big way, at the right time and it will be immortal.

By: Steynian 315

Steynian 315 — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 21:13:23 +0000

[...] Famous Obama ‘Hope’ Image Stolen? “So, the main question here is, will the communist inspired arteest Shepard Fairey share the wealth from the photo that made him famous with the actual photographer that took [...]

By: Steynian 315 « Free Canuckistan!

Steynian 315 « Free Canuckistan! — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:25:20 +0000

By: Jeff H

Jeff H — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 16:56:19 +0000

There is a grey area of copyright in issues of “derivative” art. It’s left to the courts to decide whether or not the image has been modified enough to become a new and different work. Violators might luck out on this execution or they might not. But it’s plain that Fairey took advantage of a photographer’s efforts (and a minority photographer to boot). What’s more troubling is that The One’s campaign made tons of money from the image. If there is copyright violation here, Garcia would be entitled to a share of all the profit made from the image, regardless of who made the profit. I’m sure he could find a legal team that would roll the dice on a possible multi-million dollar payday.

By: Zeta

Zeta — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 15:52:30 +0000

Uh, problem boy.

If that image is traced vector graphics, merely using an image on the background, someone doesn’t really need to acknowledge anything.

This is an often used technique: ( http://www.webdesign.org/web/vector-graphics/adobe-illustrator/how-to-tracedraw-people-from-photo-with-illustrator.7883.html ) but you are deluding yourself if you think that every original photo owner gets to get credit for the final graphic.

It is no different that seeing something on a background and drawing it on a blank canvas, except that with our modern technology our canvas just so happens to be transparent and you are able to see exactly what you trace, and mistakes are easily corrected. Still an originally blank file with 100% generated information by the artist (as opposed to, say, a collage)

By: Louis Morrone

Louis Morrone — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 08:44:31 +0000

Well, I suppose you can say it gave him a lot of publicity, which in turn made him a lot of money… But he didn’t actually sell the image we’re talking about here; I’d say that argument would hold up in court if he were sued, depending on how it is presented of course.

By: ETL

ETL — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 05:22:19 +0000

Some interesting facts I’ve gathered on on Obama’s communist-inspired artist Shepard Fairey:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2171204/posts?page=7#7

By: malarkey

malarkey — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 04:56:20 +0000

Louis Morrone on January 24th, 2009 4:35 pm Actually, the artist didn’t make any money on this poster, it all went to the campaign.
*******************************

A thief is a thief regardless. Something Obama and his thug party or you will never comprehend.

By: Dinah Lord

Dinah Lord — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 04:51:15 +0000

So typical of liberals. Lie. Cheat. Steal. Their ends always justify their means.

I can’t wait for 4 (or is it years of this shi$.

By: Warner Todd Huston

Warner Todd Huston — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 01:57:46 +0000

Actually he DID make money and lots of it. All the notice he got from that poster advertised his website and there he sells alls sorts of “art” that does NOT have anything to do with the O campaign. So, you are wrong. He made tons of cash from that poster.