Monkdogz Artblog

Shepard Fairey has admitted that he lied about which photo he used for his “Hope” image of Barak Obama to his lawyers as well as in court.  He has also admitted that he destroyed evidence and created false documents to cover up the fact about the actual photo that he used.  

His lawyers have stated that they will withdraw from the case.  Sources however suggest that Fairey may still attempt to continue his case.  

This legal battle started when A.P. accusing Fairey of using the image without payment or giving them credit.  Fairey then went on the offensive and sued AP and sought a judgement to prove that he used the image under the “fair use” of copyright law and so did not need to give credit or payment.  A.P. then countersued the following month stating Fairey had misappropriated the image.

The actual photo he used is important in this case regarding “fair use” as the degree of alteration of the original image can be used to determine the validity of the claim.  

A.P. reports that “the “HOPE” image has appeared on countless posters, stickers and buttons. It has appeared in several books and in numerous museums, including a mixed-media stenciled collage version added to the permanent collection of the National Portrait Gallery in Washington.”  It will be interesting to note what these public institutions will do about the images that they have in their possession.  What would the ethical course of action be? 

Previous post on Fairey

In the last few weeks, five friends have told me of situations where they’ve been let down by galleries, museums and art dealers. Several of them are desperately trying to get their work returned to them after exhibitions that occurred months ago. Others are trying to deal with un-kept promises and commitments.

In this environment when each sale is so hard and when it happens well earned, the last thing any of us needs is the added aggravation of people trying to take advantage or at worst stealing from us.

The sad thing is that in today’s environment you have to look after yourself and your art. The phrase “artist beware” is an unfortunate truism. There are several things that you can and should do, despite the extra effort that it will take.

Make sure you keep all correspondence and any telephone calls should be logged and annotated. If you’re really good, telephone conversations should be backed up by a letter or email.

Ensure that whoever takes responsibility for your artwork gives you a loan form or similar to cover their responsibilities and commitment as well as laying out your responsibilities. What is the insurance coverage? Who pays for delivery and shipping? Which pieces exactly will they be responsible for? What marketing and exhibition commitments are being offered? What happens when the work is sold? Who owns the copyright? What commission is deducted? How will the money be transferred? If they don’t give you one, write one yourself and ask them to sign and return it. If necessary enclose a stamped self-addressed enveloped so that they can’t find an excuse to return it.

Make sure that you do your research on the dealer, museum or gallery. Talk to as many people who have been involved with them before as possible. Contact an organization such as the Better Business Bureau to see if there are any complaints logged about them.

Much of this seems like common sense, but it’s amazing how many of us don’t do it. We hope that we can trust everyone to act on their integrity, but sometimes we can’t, so take care and protect yourselves.

And if there’s that occasion when you do come a cropper and find yourself caught up in a difficult position, ask for help. Friends are always out there to support you.

Shephard Fairey flouts the law to get free publicity.  It’s a form of guerilla marketing.  It’s really no different from the trespassing and vandalism charges that he’s faced in the past.  He was fully aware that he was using another artist’s image; he actually trawled the internet to find just the right image and he filed a lawsuit first before AP did to try and claim “fair use”.  It’s not the first time he’s done this.  He’s also sued other artists for copyright infringement of his work.  Is he so poor that he couldn’t pay for a license to use the image or at least give Mannie Garcia some credit?  I suppose he wouldn’t have received as much publicity if he had.

A little like Tony Shafrazi, who was so anti-establishment in his youth and now is a stalwart member of the art establishment,  Shephard’s success in underground art has lead to several successful corporate design and marketing companies working for corporate heavyweights such as Hasbro, Netscape, Pepsi and Urban Outfitters.  Does anybody else see the dichotomy here? 

Or is the real point that even I’m talking about it and I’m yet another fool that’s fallen into Fairey’s cleverly woven trap?