...said the artist had misled them by fabricating information and destroying other material.

Sounds very similar to this administration, doesn't it?

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
Geesh... even the poster is a rip-off.

Not really. It still stands as a great piece of art.

That the photographer didn't get original recognition is a sin of omission, a simple mistake, rather that commission, a purposeful act of cheating.

However when the actual source of the photo was discovered by the artist the cover-up became one of commission, and to no purpose what-so-ever, in my view.

He's going to have to pay big time and his reputation will take a big hit, but the poster still stands a great piece of art and is already an iconic American image.

I just wonder what this does to all the parodies?

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II

...said the artist had misled them by fabricating information and destroying other material.

Sounds very similar to this administration, doesn't it?

Yes. Indeed this is quite fitting. Why am I not surprised?