Shepard Fairey, White Entitlement, and Corporate Interests

Today the Associated Press threatened to sue Fairey. "The Associated Press has determined that the photograph used in the poster is an AP photo and that its use required permission," the AP's director of media relations, Paul Colford, said in a statement. "AP safeguards its assets and looks at these events on a case-by-case basis. We have reached out to Mr. Fairey's attorney and are in discussions. We hope for an amicable solution." You can read story here.

As someone who has criticized both Fairey and the Copyright monster (which does little for artists but tons for corporations), I have mixed feelings about this. Here are some points I want to share:

- Fairey rarely credits his sources, which is problematic. You can read my earlier posts in which I link to examples of this. In the past, those who have critiqued this did not have the legal nor financial means to sue him. Now he may be getting sued by the big guys. This is something he could have avoided if he were to have credited his sources. He has a team working with him, it's not impossible, its the right thing to do.

- Copyright laws work in the favor of the corporate elite. So what is happening to Fairey is bound to affect us all as artists, in negative ways. My friend Gan Golan said it best, "If Fairey gets sued by AP it could set a precedent that is harmful for all artists who use  photographic imagery that appear news media. It is bad for parody artists and satirists. It is bad for all artists who re-appropriate and reinterpret imagery of any kind.

- Fairey loves to rip off the art of people who are part of the counter culture, many times they are people of color, or groups who have fought for social justice, or radicals who have fought against their own countries. In my opinion, this is commodification. The fact that he feels entitled to do this points at his white privilege and white entitlement. When you rip off Cuban artists, Chicano artists, even groups like the Black Panthers - and you fail to give credit - that to me is an excercise of white privilege. Now, the person who took the original photograph is a Latino, and from his commentary, it sounds like he is a working class Latino.

- The original photographer, Mannie Garcia, said this. "This is not about me making money off this, it's about recognition. I made the most iconic image of our time, and I'd like it to make a difference, not make me money. I'm a blue collar photographer - I am out there on the grind every day. I spend more energy looking for work than doing work. I just want Shepard Fairey to say "Alright, you're the guy. Thank you." See full story

- The whole monster that is copyright infrigement works in favor of corporate America. But let's be clear that this is not a case of Corporate America vs. Street Artist. Fairey regularly consults for corporations, and he has done some campaigns in which he outright steals revolutionary imagery to use for capitalist agenda's. So again, this is about an artist who loves to with corporations. See this really sad example.

- Fairey threatened to sue Baxtor Orr for parodying his work - which is baffling to me
http://animalnewyork.com/news/2008/04/shepard-fairey-threatens-to-su.php

- And finally, the folks repping Fairey in his legal case are people I align with. "He's hired Anothony Falzone, a lawyer and executive director of the Fair Use Project at Stanford University. Falzone is also the heir apparent to Lawrence Lessig, the famed Stanford copyright law professor and founder of Creative Commons, the movement that encourages creators to modify copyright terms in order to increase the amount of creativity (cultural, educational, and scientific content) in the commons." I am a MAJOR proponent of Creative Commons, in fact, the new book I worked on with Josh MacPhee, Reproduce & Revolt, is licensed under Creative Commons, and it includes work by Fairey himself.

So these are my thoughts...some contradictory yes, but it's important to see this from the perspective of a woman of color, artist, activist, propagandist, agitator... my opinion is in formation, and I'm open to hearing other's perspective on this.

Comments

[corey mason]

Hola Favianna ...

I'm feelin you on all points ... yes, here's to appropriate artistic acknowledgements .. and keeping away from unnecessary ugliness (litigation$) .. ayayay.

"Shepard"isms are fascinating .. now thrust in the national limelight .. via this poster ( sensation /scandal? what media fodder ) and recently, Colbert Report.. he has been producing brooding images /dubs /spins for quite some time .. often with deep cynical, portentous, or wry tones ( Andre / HOPE) .. and now his sh-- ( big-bro-mock-oganda) seems to be flipped on its head ( nearly literally via O's retouched foto).. He seems to have been calling himself into this arena for quite sometime .. and it will be equally fascinating to see how the play of law, art, legal and artistic wit play out in the arena. What a collision ...its puzzling and energizing .. i will be observing .. and visualizing/vibzinUP highest outcomes and learning, circularly ...

Corey in El Cerrito,CA = : ) ~

[GPrimm]

When I first saw the Fairey poster of Obama, I immediately recalled the source photograph, but didn't make the leap to the recognition of the extent of Fairey's rip, chalking it up to good intentions as the photo / poster was being used in a "good cause." Sadly, I was not familiar with the body of Fairey's work. Shepherd has apparently been very busy deconstructing social movement art for the sole purpose of lining his pockets...flattening the world by flattening the intent of other artists.

Also, he is massively violating the meaning of "fair use" in borrowing / lifting / sampling the art work of creatively original artists (emphasis on "work") for his own Kapitalistic greed need.

Manifesting his inner capitalistic pig, in other words.

I certainly don't buy any argument about his ever having been a "starving artist", as his history clearly shows a massive contempt for the work or rights of others.

Too sad.

[spartacous Cacao]

This a copy of an email i sent to the obey web site in early December and the response from the "Re-contextual" plagiarists, sounds like the one not doing research is him, besides the very childish response.

http://www.guardian.From: "spartacous cacao
> Date: December 1, 2008 1:32:13 AM PST
> To: dan@obeygiant.com
> Cc: tina@studionumber-one.com

well it will be interesting to see what the good shepherd will do next regarding Obama or will he continue pushing state propaganda on us all?
His pick of eric holder prove its just more of the same.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/nov/25/attornery-general-eric-holder-chiquita

From: "IN STUDIO ONLY
> Date: December 1, 2008 2:02:07 PM PST
> To: Tina S
> Subject: Re: Next Obama Series
What are you talking about? Are you actually ignorant enough to think Obama is "more of the same"? I'm all for being critical and irreverent if it is done intelligently. Maybe YOU should be the next president and solve all the problems? Or maybe you should do some research first. Good luck.
-Shepard

[spartacous Cacao]

I'm starting to think he works for the "Chair" and the mk ultra project.

[Daniel Lobo]

Thanks Favianna,

This is a great note on the complexities and worth approaches to the issues. I do agree with your overall analysis and contradictions, and having seen myself in similar circumstances defending the unfair circumstance in which this artist is just an instrument of manipulation I feel the pain. Unfortunately, if AP goes ahead the Rogers vs Koons is an disappointing and reminiscent precedent, that much in the same fashion that you describe did a lot of damage to open cultural development despite diverging opinions on the work of Koons, which incidentally I find far more interesting than Fairey's, but that is another story.

I think that we are going to be pulled in a highly demagogic debate, where issues of class, ownership are going to be manipulated, in a cover up to seal up public domain, hybridization, and the constant flux of shared culture. For instance since you wrote your entry I have found in closed circles an outrage not so much for the disrespect of not recognizing the reference taken, but for doing so with a "working class" photographer. Often meaning the amount of work put into ones labor, which is far from the issue here, Fairey also makes a dedicated effort, Garcia also got paid, and he does not make a change of condition claim per se other than recognition, which albeit late, he got. And this is used to attack not so much Fairey but the notion that truthfulness and authenticity reside with that picture, whereas it really touches on far more complex issues like the ones you point out.

Anyhow, I do agree that this is not so much about him, or his Obama piece, but about us and what effect it may have if he is cut short from doing what he does through repressive means on the rest of us and the culture we aim to share.

Cheers,

Daniel