Fairey’s positioning of Barack Obama’s mouth is quite a bit off from the original photo. The shading too gives Obama’s head a slightly different shape. If you follow the line of his eyes to a pointon the webpage and do the same with his mouth angle – they actually meet at some point – on this page. The left side of Barack’s mouth actually extends well below that of the original photo. So, just how accurate a rendition of the original photo does Fairey’s art-piece display?

Similarly, if some copies an image from any photograph and paint it – in a stylised form – no-one is going to say it’s a copyright infringement – no matter how many millions they make from the painting.

Similarly, if someone does a picasso rendition of said photo – are the copyright infringement police going to go after that too.

I personally think the fact that Manny Garcia does not feature in this claim by AP says a lot.

Let’s take this type of claim a little further …

If someone works in an environment – where many strange/biizarre things take place and photographs any situation – does their workplace own the rights to any published photo depicing and said situation? Or, what if someone writes a detailed account of this same situation – does their printed work – in whatever form – fall prey to copyright infringement if it beings in financial success?

However, I think where intimate photographs of one’s partner are later printed an exhibited for public viewing – this virtual “contraband” act does infringe upon an unwritten copyright law does indeed break an unwritten copyright law – whether monetary gain is achieved or not.

This is why photographers are required to obtain model release forms for even the most basic studio photograph. Street-shooters on the otherhand – capture life in public – as they see it. If someone objects to having their photograph taken – then any scrupulous photographer should abstain from such.

Last year, when I had a photograph taken of myself with a singer – her daughter on her hip, she tried to shireld her daughter as she for many obvious reasons did not want her daughter’s image to be displayed in the public domain – as most photographs of this artist on the internet are indeed those taken by others. It was therefore prudent that I photoshop out whatever part of her daughter that did in fact appear in the photograph – not that any verbal agreement was entered into – but that I indeed understood her concern and thus did the honourable thing to protect her daughter.