Mr Brainwash Show ICONS New York 2010, by snausages on Jan 19, 2010 17:21:55 GMT 1, I've seen the Huffington article before. It blatantly cherry picks details to suit the argument they wanted to make while ignoring issues that don't serve its purpose. They cite a Koons case where he won on fair use terms, but they fail to mention the cases that Koons lost, that Warhol lost etc. Many artists have lost.

They may have a point that the derivative work doesn't harm the value of the original. But whether the piece is "transformative" like they contend is highly opinionated. It's no more transformative than many of the works Fairey has made with other photographers that he did give credit to. Don't really have more to say, it's not up to you or me.


But to get back to the original topic, I get what you're saying, if the court determines he "transformed" it good for him, but it's not as simple as fair use if the photo was from a news source.
www.ap.org/pages/about/terms.html

4. All material ("Materials") displayed or transmitted on this site, including but not limited to text, photographs, images, illustrations, video clips, audio clips, and graphics are owned by AP or its members, and are protected by United States and international copyright, trademarks, service marks, and other proprietary rights, laws and treaties.

5. Except as provided in this agreement, you may not copy, reproduce, publish, transmit, transfer, sell, rent, modify, create derivative works from, distribute, repost, perform, display, or in any way commercially exploit the Materials carried on this site, nor may you infringe upon any of the copyrights or other intellectual property rights contained in the Materials. You may not remove or alter, nor cause to be removed or altered, any copyright, trademark, or other proprietary notices or visual marks and logos from the Materials.