Today's Evil Beet Gossip

HOPE You Brought Your Checkbook

The Barrack Obama "Hope" Poster by Richard Fairey
I promise I’ll get back to covering the nail biting events in the Anna Nicoke Smith drug use debate in a moment, but this is important.

If you’re reading this, it means you live in a place that has internet access, which means you’ve also seen the above poster.

The now ubiquitous image was “created” (read: re-colored in Photoshop) by artist Shepard Fairey during the 2008 campaign, and quickly spawned countless parodies. My favorite is this Amy Winehouse inspired one.

However, the image, which has made Fairey a lot of money,  is based on a photograph owned by the Associated Press– a photograph that Fairey didn’t have permission to use. The artist and the Ap (sounds like the title of a left wing children’s book) have been tangling in court for a year over “fair use” issues.

This is important to you because you could get into a lot of trouble if you scribble on a picture of a famous person, post it on the internet, and then that picture becomes really popular. (Sasha could get sued for her Zack Efron Avocado.)

But now the powers that be say that Fairey’s case has “fallen apart” because he lied, or in the artist’s words “was confused about,” exactly which AP photo he based his work on.

Fairey himself admitted that he didn’t use The Associated Press photo of Obama seated next to actor George Clooney he originally said his work was based on — which he claimed would have been covered under “fair use,” the legal claim that copyrighted work can be used without having to pay for it.

Instead he used … a solo picture of the future president… underlined with the caption “HOPE.” Fairey said that he tried to cover up his error by submitting false images and deleting others.

The distinction is critical because fair use can sometimes be determined by how much of an original image or work was altered in the creation of a new work.  Fair use cases also may consider the market value of the copyrighted material and the intended use of the newly created work.

So, both photos were taken at the same event, by the same photographer. The difference is that one of them was zoomed in on Obama, and the other was not.

So, if  Fairey had used the wider-angle picture of Obama sitting next to Clooney, the artist would have a “fair use” leg to stand on?

We use a lot of photos and videos on this site, and I’m personally terrified of my broke ass getting sued by some giant corporation because I didn’t credit something properly. Please don’t tell me that the “crop” command is the difference between freedom of expression and copyright infringement.

4 CommentsLeave a comment

  • I’d like to point out the Associated Press is a non-profit organization, which provides us with an incredible amount of information from journalists and photographers worldwide. Fairey initially sued AP so he would not have to pay copyright fees-they had previously been in negotiations. SO while I support the idea of fair-use, he clearly tried to take advantage of a situation so as to not have to pay the AP for the photo.

    Basically, he tried to screw a non-profit for money, so I hope AP wins their countersuit, as they will donate the money to their emergency relief fund.

  • SF is NOT making ANY money off this image. All proceeds have been donated to the campaign or to charity.

  • this kinda sucks (for e very designer really)- I mean so many of us just use whatever to make stuff (for class, to support someone) that we dont intend to sell, but then it blows up and WTF are we supposed to do then? anyways… yeah that whole thing was stupid- same photog, same event, one just had george clooney. It REALLY doesn’t matter which one he used.

  • It´s not the first time Fairey´s work generate controversy, he constantly uses images of famous paintings or photos or art languages to do his work (not this case but he usually makes money with it). It´s not like a work you do for class.

    So, it´s a big debate… should designers can manipulate copyright material for free or money?. Anyway is true he is giving it a new meaning.

    I try to generate my own images but when politics are involved sometimes manipulating a photo to create a new meaning generates a more powerful message.

    Sorry about my english, it is not my native language.