But he’s bumped off too many things in the past.

nd jst by lkng t hm y cn tll h’s dchbg.

First of all, tons of people are spouting fair use without actually having any idea of what fair use is. Fairy reproduced nearly the entire image, and the resulting artwork consists of almost solely that image. It’d be much easier to argue fair use for the inauguration poster featuring this image, because it consists of multiple other components – but with fair use laws the size of the image and its role in the final piece of work are VERY important.

So there’s that point. Next up is Fairey’s reputation; sure he can create a good looking image – but the guy has no common courtesy for fellow artists, many of whom he consistently rips off. “They live in another country” is not a proper excuse for neglecting to credit the original work. It’s seemingly intentionally misleading to the viewer so that they hold Fairey in higher esteem, and if it’s actually not the motive (which I sincerely doubt) then it’s just sheer idiocy. So that being said, it’s not like this was a momentary judgment lapse or a one time thing for Fairey – I can produce a list as long as my arm of artists/artwork that he’s used, displayed in galleries, and sold as merchandise, that he hasn’t even attempted to credit. He has no regard for the original artist until they actually pursue legal action.

Hey, remember the time Fairey (or at least his legal entity) threatened to sue for a parody of his Obey giant image? (http://animalnewyork.com/2008/04/shepard-fairey-threatens-to-sue-artist-for-obey-giant-parody/) Bizarrely hypocritical, especially considering the artwork produced was actually a parody, which is protected by fair use depending on the circumstances – and that Baxter Orr was actually INSPIRED by and looked up to Fairey.

There’s a difference between a commercial artist and a street artist. You can be both, but you have to understand that they are both different worlds, you can’t be a commercial artist without citing your work. Fairey seems to have no understanding of this, or just doesn’t care. You can’t say he didn’t profit from this either, because he did. The fact that he donated his profits to a political campaign doesn’t mean he donated them to charity – he profited directly, and used the money how he wished. If he donated the money to starving orphans, sure – that’s great and entirely defendable. But he took an image and used it to push his personal political agenda.

I admit, he does gain some respect for actually apologizing – but honestly, if you think about it… what choice did he have? he lied himself into a corner and had no choice but to eat crow. He’s done the same thing in the past, and I’m certain he’ll do it again in the future. He’s just covering his ass while getting a ton of free publicity. It’s actually pretty smart, but completely tactless – imagine all the goddamn money the courts and parties involved would be saving if the guy just purchased or asked permission to use the image. It just puts a bad taste in my mouth. Fairey’s not putting up a fight for fair use – he’s just using it as a platform to obtain support and the recent admission to lying makes this incredibly apparent.

So overall, I get it – he’s against establishment and that’s his thing, he’s out there getting arrested and missing gallery events in his honor (that were paid for by his fans who still love him unconditionally). Most of the time I’m fine with that, you have license to be an ass, but his constant disregard for other artists just grinds my gears. You don’t have to like them, but at least share some respect and decency within your professional community. Take a second and think about your work a bit more than how it’s going to benefit yourself – even Andy Warhol could do that.

I’ve made some character assumptions here supported by the facts provided, and honestly I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if Fairey is actually a really nice guy. This is not a personal attack. I recommend that you get past the blind fanboyism and blind fair use support (actually go read about it) – and just look at the facts.

And please, I beg of you, stop quoting Pablo Picasso.

I’m impressed BB that when the chickens came home to roost you didn’t shoot them. :)

Re: Shepard not being original. In the 70s the block screen print was used widely. It wasn’t anyone’s. I’m not the only one who took the block screen print style forced by the peculiarities of the process and made paintings that mimicked the effect.

It was a good stylized thing to do and belonged to nobody. We all sold stuff on the street using it.

Much of the other stuff Shepard was supposed to have ‘stolen’ according to one writer’s assessment at the Boston Globe was also free range at various times.

One looks for differences within styles in art, unless, of course, one has a personal vendetta against a particular artist. This apparently is something that has developed against Mr. Fairey as it does so often against anyone who helps Democrats or liberals.

I wrote on Shepard Fairey and those allegations at http://dotcommonsense.blog-city.com/boston_globes_cartoonist_attacks_obamas_poster_artist.htm

holtt is exactly correct. He has had more than ample time to man up. It was originally supposed to be a one off freebie. People would have understood. He blew it even if he is hip and cool and his adversary in court is a big impersonal company.

Please remember that Boing Boing is not

* wikipedia
* Digg
* google news or similar aggregators, or
* a News Organization like CNN, NYT, etc.

Boing Boing is Boing Boing.

Nowhere in this blog will you read a promise that we will always be first to post about a news story.

Nowhere in this blog will you read a promise that we blog as “impartial journalists.” You show me where that promise is, and I will fax you a fucking cookie.

I have bias in this story, and i disclosed it right up top. I like the artist’s work. We have mutual friends. He seems like a stand-up guy. I have no love for AP’s extensive history of copyright bullying in other matters. All of that, right up at the top of the post.

I got word about this update on Friday morning from a friend who is close to Mr. Fairey.

I reached out for more official word from various sources, and the news broke widely that afternoon. I was in the middle of moving my office and home, so was dealing with some personal upheaval — not cranking out a lot of new posts that day. But also, wanted to take time before posting about this.

To the extent that we have a shared ethos or guiding editorial principles here at Boing Boing, this is one such principle:

Do not post simply to be “first.” Particularly when you’re talking about a news story, post when you have something to add to the story, some insight to reveal that isn’t elsewhere.

I took a couple days over the weekend (when I normally don’t blog anyway) to think about my past posts on the story, and about what I know of Mr. Fairey as a human being. I wanted to hear what others close to the case (EFF, legal experts) had to say. I wanted to hear what the AP would say. I read lots of coverage over the weekend. Then, I wrote this.

If that ain’t good enough for you, you should stop reading Boing Boing right now.

Also: Boing Boing per se does not cover or think or write about or not write about anything. A group of individuals who blog at Boing Boing do. I am responsible for the content of this post. Pesco is responsible for the content of his earlier related post. And so on. We often share opinions, and we do sometimes discuss what we’re writing about with each other, but there is no one “voice of Boing Boing.”

Also: we are all lizard people and we come from planet Zoltron to pwn you.

So they’re within their rights to take the dispute to court, but there’s something to be said for being magnanimous sometimes.

You owe us $. Please pay.

http://eng.plakaty.ru/i/plakats/medium/75.jpg

L E N I N
U S S R ,
(Seriously, Fairey stole more from the Soviet than from AP.)

It’s always best to call an a-hole an a-hole at every opportunity whether he or she’s open source mash-up cool or not.

I think AP’s legal actions amount to little more than calling Mr. Fairey an a-hole in public.

That’s about the best the will come of all this.

If that photo was in someone’s facebook album, no one would have batted an eyelid.

Obviously Fairey panicked and screwed up, but seriously.
I guess the more things change…

Luther Blissett? The footballer?

I kind of feel bad that he’s been caught up in this. It would be nice if the AP would back down and simply enjoy the fact that they paid the guy who took a photo that helped inspire an iconic work of our time. But I’m not losing any sleep over it; by all accounts, he’s a bit of an ass, and whatever comes of this, his reputation as an artist will not suffer.

I’m sure the neo-cons are grunting and squealing with delight.

I’d be the first to agree that the original photo is not particularity interesting, and that Fairey’s work has a greater ‘artistic height’ than the AP photo.

That said, it’s pretty clearly a derivative work in the legal sense of the word. A professional artist like Fairey should’ve known better to use an image he didn’t have the rights to. The fact that it’s a fairly dime-a-dozen image of Obama isn’t an excuse. (You’d think that’d make it all the easier for him to find an image he had the rights to, a Free-as-in-speech one if necessary)

http://animalnewyork.com/2008/04/shepard-fairey-threatens-to-sue-artist-for-obey-giant-parody/

http://www.theeastsiderla.com/2009/08/shepard-fairey-tags-eastsider-as.html