It’s funny, Shepard was on NPR a little over a week ago talking about this. He mentioned he had no idea who the original photo was, he admitted he had rotoscoped an AP image, and he also said he’d tried to find out who the photographer was but couldn’t. He even went so far as to make a public plea stating that if anyone knew who it was, or was the individual themselves, to contact him as he wanted to give them credit for the original photograph.

Legally speaking, I think the AP is on shaky ground. Yes he based it off their image but it’s no longer that image. And, to be honest, if he hadn’t specifically stated where he got it the AP would likely have had no case as it’s just Obama’s face and nothing that is specific to anything the AP does.

At the bare minimum, I hope more of Shepard’s past art is dug up because of this and he’s forced to finally reconcile with his other copyright issues.

I used to be a huge fan of OBEY, and as a STREET ARTIST he is awesome! But as an actual artist and designer, I have issues. He is good at his illustrations, no doubt about that, but I just can’t get past the immorality and hypocrisy: http://www.art-for-a-change.com/Obey/index.htm

I feel as though it is a situation where even if it just had the composition flipped they could have probably gotten away as it is I don’t think so as it doesn’t fall under transformation I feel. Only thing it might is yes as Andy Warhol got away with it….

Isn’t all of his work based on other people’s photographs?

“Legally speaking, I think the AP is on shaky ground. Yes he based it off their image but it’s no longer that image.”

Exactly, this is the stupidest thing I’ve heard in a while.

Copyright is the law but, they aren’t the same image.. not anymore.

Its an amazing design and when I look at it I think of Shepard Fairey, not AP. Too late?

I love Shepard’s work, it’s lame that the AP wants to sue him, BUT—they will probably win, hands down. If they take it to court and a jury thinks that the Obama poster looks like that photo—he’ll lose. There’s no changing something 10-15% rule—that’s complete and utter BS, it’s just not true. If Shepard took the photo he’d be covered, but he didn’t. He’s especially screwed if they do in fact have it registered at the U.S. Copyright Office, he won’t have a leg to stand on. The whole thing is super lame, but this is the legal system we live in and everybody is trying to make a buck anyway they can—especially with the economy in the state it’s in :(

To be honest at this point I would think he would be more responsible about this. It was after all for a presidential candidate.

Turn about is fair play, If he wants to sue other for using his stuff. We are in a creative industry, the photographer he BORROWED the photo form deserves to be paid for usage too doesn’t he?