Currently, I’m very occupied with copyright questions. One case of (imho) copyright infringement is described in the article “Judge Rules Fair Use in Photographer’s Copyright Case Against Andy Warhol”. Particularly interesting here are the comments by photographer, Lynn Goldsmith who was sued by the Andy Warhol Foundation. I’m basically on the side of Mrs. Goldsmith here, and imho Andy Warhol clearly infringed her copyright.
One commenter who basically opposes Mrs. Goldsmith’s claim says: “And I’m sorry this is an emotional ordeal for you, I truly am – but there is a place in art for transformative works of all mediums.” – Bob Cooley
Who’s right, then? My opinion on transformative works is that those artists decorate themselves with foreign feathers, and the question remains: Is this legitimate? Is this reprehensible?
But there’s an exception, and it’s called “fair use”. I discovered an article by Stephanie Morrow, entitled “What Are Derivative Works Under Copyright Law?”
Quote: “Only copyright owners have the exclusive right to produce derivative works based on their original, copyrighted works.” – Stephanie Morrow
And: “So you’ve been inspired by someone else’s work to make one of your own, and you’ve used some of that original. That means you’ve infringed the original author’s copyright, right? Well, not necessarily. There exists a carve-out to infringement that applies with particular force to the derivative works arena: the “fair use” doctrine.”
Besides the case of the Andy Warhol Foundation vs. Lynn Goldsmith, I found another example of possible “fair use”: the series “Time Travel” and “Selfie” by Hungarian photographer & Photoshop artist, Flóra Borsi. Apparently, she wasn’t sued for copyright infringement although her work is well-known. I discovered the said series yesterday, and although the idea is stunning & the technical execution flawless, there remains the answer: What about the photographers of the original pictures? They were not given any credit.