Is Shepard Fairey the new Richard Prince?

Before reading this article look at the full version of the  photo 

It has been all over the photo community the outrage on so many sides over who can get their greedy little fingers on Shepard Fairey's rednition of the AP (or Mannie Garcia) photo of Barack Obama taken by Mannie Garcia. First Fairey screwed up by saying he took the pose from a Mannie Garcia photo. The actual full frame shot was of Obama and George Clooney at a Press Club. The shot was just that. A shot. No big deal by any standards (aside from the subjects). Not to mention the flag pole coming out of the top of Barack Obama's head. When Mannie took the image he was not thinking he was taking the most incredible image of Obama in history. He did not think his image would be used for anything more than what he got paid for, the standard freelancer day rate that AP gave him. Nor did AP think they had an incredible image either. They saw the image as just the same way anybody else would. Just one more shot of a celebrity and a presidential hopeful. One of millions that where flooding the earth. 

Then came Shepard Fairey. He knew what he wanted to do from the start. Before he even saw or knew of Mannie Garcia, he knew that he was going to make a poster of Obama. Where Fairey screwed up was in saying he got the idea and angle from Mannie's shot. Where AP screwed up was in not taking that proof and suing him immediately. Where Mannie Garcia screwed up was in doing ANY FORM of work for hire. So now what. Mannie is out of the picture. He gets nothing. In the same way Alan Diaz's photo of Elian Gonzalez in the closet went around the world. Who made the millions? AP. Not Diaz. Diaz however did win the Pulitzer which does carry a nice cash prize, but that doesn't come close to the huge amount of money the AP monster received. Alan was the one sneaking in front of armed men putting his life at risk to get the shot. I wonder if there have been any paintings made in Cuba based on this photo.

Fairey is not the first artist to make a rendition from other artists. That is why I associate Shepard Fairey to Richard Prince. Because he is essentially doing the same thing. Richard Prince is most known in the photo community for being a 're-photographer' or 'Appropriation artist.' He stole photos that others had taken. It would be as if I where to take a photo of Joe Rosenthal's raising of the flag on Iwo Jima, blow it up really big and then call it mine. Prince's art was more obvious. But then again, his photo of the Cowboy sold a Sotheby's a few years ago for 3.4 million dollars. The most a photograph has ever sold for. So who is right?

I believe both are.

One of my mentors once told me, "If you stand 20 photographers in front of the same tree and tell them to photograph it, you will have 20 different point of views." 

I think the image of Obama cannot be copyrighted. He is out there and advertised just as if he was a can of Coca Cola or Campbell's Soup (enter Warhol). He is as public and iconic a figure as anything else. I honestly think that the amounts of photos taken of the man, you could put together a 3-d version of him that would be flawless. But whose version would that be? The artist(s). The creators of the rendition. So should God be suing because he created Obama. Should the parents. How far back do we go? 

The argument as to whether Fairey should have licensed the photo by AP or Garcia or even tell anybody he used Garcia's photo is null. The painting makes no resemblance to Garcia's true image in the way it was taken. Not the way Garcia took it. In my opinion, this is what I t6hink should happen.

1. Mannie should take advantage of this and market the hell out of the image. Try to work out a license with AP and get some kind of cut from the 'newly cropped' photo. If not, he should still market himself to put some kind of name out there. This is a huge opportunity for him to get credibility. Look at his website and you will see he has been around. Maybe someone should tell him to join ASMP. BTW, did he license the photo that he is using on his website? Or the Fairey posters?

Also, maybe the new agencies should stop running the cropped version of Mannie's photo. It is giving the wrong impression and is manipulating the audience to think Fairey's poster is an exact steal. Especially when the caption reads A poster of President Barack Obama, right, by artist Shepard Fairey is shown for comparison. (AP)

Here is the way Mannie saw and took the photo

2. AP should try to sue Fairey for the rights of the photo that he used, but they should win/loose. By this, I mean since Fairey admitted he used an AP photo and copied the likeness from that, then he abused copyright and profitted from it. BUT if you watch the Colbert Report (true journalism) you will see he admits that he gets no profit from the sale of the poster. What is hilarious is that when asked if he is going after people stealing the poster he stated "Only when people try to use it for profit do I go after them for copyright." When asked if he was making a profit, he said "Someone is."

3. Fairey should not be making any profit if he says he is not. If so, he should relinquish his share appropriate to AP. I don't like it. I think Mannie should get a share, but that is what happens when you do something stupid like work for hire. AP is the copyright holder, Fairey said he used the image for the poster, he did not license the use of the image. it is cut and dry. If Fairey was the noble one, he should have already listed the item as a public domain and free to everyone. I doubt he did so since he only pursues people that are making profit from the poster.

Finally. If AP wins this case, maybe every owner of all the other works of art that Fairey stole from should come out of the woodwork and try to get their pound of fat. Maybe this will spark some artists to get off their ass and realize that the first artist is just as important or more important than they are. Fairey is an accomplished  artists and a true artist. but he is also a plagiarist. His work is not original, and screams of anarchy at best. But who isn't a plagiarist that makes a painting of Jesus or pretends to be a famous president or any of the like. Maybe it still all comes down to the fact that a photographer is not really ever treated as an artist. That should "CHANGE".

Oh by the way. Did anybody notice he was recently arrested for vandalism.

Here are a few links to look at.

Very good article about Fairey's work - http://www.art-for-a-change.com/Obey/index.htm

Fairey interview - http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/215976/january-15-2009/shepard-fairey

About Richard Prince -  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Prince

Mannie Garcia - http://web.mac.com/manniegarcia/iWeb/mannie%20garcia/Hope.html

Yahoo news article - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090209/ap_on_re_us/obama_poster

USA Today - http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Mannie%20Garcia

Fox News - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/04/ap-sues-copyright-infringement-obama-hope-posters/

Another blogger who has done more research than me - http://thomashawk.com/tag/mannie-garcia

Shepard Firey - http://obeygiant.com/