To anyone excited about AP threatening Zimmerman... Shepard Fairey

[cthulu2016]

Last edited Fri Jan 24, 2014, 06:23 PM - Edit history (2)

The last time AP did this shit it was over the Obama poster by Shepard Fairey.



Fairey did not have 1% of Zimmerman's argument. The Obama HOPE poster was much, much closer to impermissible infringement. Farey's work is more mechanical, more literal, closer to competing with the purpose of the original (though still not sensibly competative) and less transformative.

The Zimmerman work of the prosecuter is undeniably transformative to an extreme degree, and there is even less conceivable argument that the Zimmerman work reduces demand for reprint rights to AP photos. How could anyone argue that what Zimmerman did to the original photo was not "transformative," altering the original with new expression, meaning, or message? (The legal definition)

But for some mysterious reason, people's conception of an abstraction like the propriety of use of distorted pictures of public figures is dependent on who does the distorting.

And that is a tragic way for a human mind to operate.


Perhaps if Righthaven rises from the dead and goes after Zimmerman next we will find out how awesome Righthaven suddenly is.

[nykym]

1. Righthaven is

Dead.
Could not afford the legal fees.

[FourScore]

2. Havard law's take on Fairey vs AP

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v25/25HarvJLTech243.pdf

[cthulu2016]

4. Wonderful resource. Thanks for posting

[brush]

3. Zimmerman is NOT actually painting, you know.

He's using Photoshop filters to get those effects on a scanned image.

Photoshop has many filters you can use on images to create thousands of different looks.

What zimmy is doing takes no talent, just an entry-level knowledge of Photoshop.

He wouldn't know where to start if he went into an art store and had to buy supplies to paint with. He wouldn't know gesso from linseed oil from his murdering a-hole.

So he has about an equal chance as Farley had of beating the suit — none.