1. Appropriation Art and Intellectual Property
Infringed
Appropriation Art and Intellectual Property

2. Overview Discussion and exploration of appropriation art
Court case analysis
Results of appropriation
Legal, moral, and social issues
Presentation of artistic works and process
Create a jarring and provocative aesthetic
Argument for appropriation art as a medium that is not infringing
Certain level of alteration has been made
Difficulty in quantifying this alteration
Display of the creative process to help guide viewers in understanding when this level of alteration has been made
Examine the intentions of an artist by comparing imitation and inspiration in the process
Motives of the artist are important for understanding the significance of each case
Careful outline of the appropriation process

3. Copyright Infringement:
The use of works protected by copyright law without permission.
Copyright protection does not encompass creative ideas
Appropriation:
The use of pre-existing images or objects with little transformation applied to them.
Sample and readopt visual aspects
Dadaism & Pop Art
American Gothic
Grant Wood (1930)

4. Shepard Fairey v. The Associated Press
Street artist Shepard Fairey created the Hope poster in 2008
Photo the poster was based on was shot by Mannie Garcia of the AP
Lawsuit in 2009
A.P. wanted compensation for the posters profits
Fairey responded with a fair use defense
Fairey admitted to using the photo and destroying evidence
Case never came to a final verdict
Fairey and the A.P. settled privately out of court

5. Created discourse around the value of work
Garcia’s work would likely never have reached the same level of fame
Need to credit sources for imagery
Garcia, Mannie. Obama Photograph. April 2006
Fairey, Shepard. Obama Hope Work. February 5, 2008

6. Patrick Cariou v. Richard Prince
Canal Zone exhibition by Richard Prince in 2008
Works featuring imagery by Patrick Cariou
Lawsuit in 2011
Initial ruling held Prince’s work violated Cariou’s creative property
Pieces unfairly damaged potential markets for Cariou
Destruction of all infringing copies of the work
Appealed to the Second Circuit court in 2013
Validity of Prince’s transformation was not correctly applied
Most of the pieces were seen as transformative enough

7. Artistic intent and subjectivity
What standards are there to determine appropriation
Who is the real judge of this – “reasonable” viewers and artists
Art could be interpreted and viewed differently
Cariou, Patrick. Yes, Rasta. 2000
Prince, Richard. Graduation. 2008

8. Art Rogers v. Jeff Koons
Photographer Art Rogers took a picture of a couple holding puppies
Sold this image for cards and other products
Jeff Koons used this image to create a sculpture
Koons sold several copies of the sculpture, making large profits
Rogers sued for copyright infringement
Koons used parody as defense of fair use
Court found the two pieces too close in similarities
A “reasonable person” would recognize it as a copy
Fair use rejected since the piece was not different in meaning or aesthetic

9. Koons, Jeff. String of Puppies. 1988
Can you build upon another artists work to create your own original piece
Photography as art or as documentation, is it creative and artistic
Intentions of the artist, parody and commentary may not be good enough for blatant copying.
Imitation vs inspiration, creating something original, not derivative
Rogers, Art. Puppies. 1985
Koons, Jeff. String of Puppies. 1988

11. Questions?