It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"HOPE" poster determined to be rip-off

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Geesh... even the poster is a rip-off.



Artist admits using key AP photo for 'HOPE' poster

NEW YORK – Shepard Fairey's claim that he had the right to use a news photo to create his famous Barack Obama "HOPE" poster became a widely watched court case about fair use that now appears to have nearly collapsed.

By Friday night, his attorneys — led by Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project at Stanford University — said they intend to withdraw from the case and said the artist had misled them by fabricating information and destroying other material.




posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   

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


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



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   

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?



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


Do you seriously think that he didn't know which photo he used to create his work? One photo was of Obama and George Cloony, the other was a solo of Obama. Both photos were AP photos. Remember, he's the one that brought suit against the AP under false pretenses, after he destroyed evidence. The AP countersued.

This is not an act of omission but one of commission.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   

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?



new topics

top topics
 
2

log in

join