Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

bobduca

(1,763 posts)

19. Painting a photograph, doesn't that fall under "Fair use" clause of copyright law

Reply to kpete (Original post)

Thu Apr 10, 2014, 10:56 AM

Apr 2014

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#Fair_use_as_a_defense

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

George W. Bush Used Top Google Results for All Paintings; Who Will Sue for Copyright Infringement? [View all] kpete Apr 2014 OP

AWOL Bush is compleat Republican Berlum Apr 2014 #1

Meh--let him have his painting. He's not a bad artist, really, and it keeps him TwilightGardener Apr 2014 #2

He's copying photographs . . . brush Apr 2014 #3

bush kpete Apr 2014 #4

So? What's the story? Dawgs Apr 2014 #15

Huh? brush Apr 2014 #31

Pretty simple. Why should anyone care that Bush likes to paint? Dawgs Apr 2014 #39

I agree brush Apr 2014 #40

Exactly. I don't get why Dems are getting so excited about this. Dawgs Apr 2014 #14

I think some are just put-off by the Corp-Media fawning over him. "Isnt he cute". nm rhett o rick Apr 2014 #22

Maybe. The media is obviously trying to rehab the Bush name for Jebster, but TwilightGardener Apr 2014 #25

They are transformative Generic Other Apr 2014 #5

The Chirac and Sirleaf edhopper Apr 2014 #12

No-Class Action Suit. Octafish Apr 2014 #6

It is amusing that the investigators couldn't find the right Karzai photo Ms. Toad Apr 2014 #7

Copying from a photograph is not a copyright violation. NV Whino Apr 2014 #8

Agreed. Xyzse Apr 2014 #9

a cheat, a bad artist, and... Supersedeas Apr 2014 #13

Actually it can be as it is a 'derivative work'. PoliticAverse Apr 2014 #26

Then there's this NV Whino Apr 2014 #27

Somebody has WAAAAAAAAY too much time on their hands LOL snooper2 Apr 2014 #10

And Dubya had an mstinamotorcity2 Apr 2014 #11

that's "nookular" corkhead Apr 2014 #24

OOPS mstinamotorcity2 Apr 2014 #41

It would be a small, but savory, legal accountability nt/ UTUSN Apr 2014 #16

Copying from a photograph or image without permission is legal - until you try to sell it. canoeist52 Apr 2014 #17

Fairey lost his court challenge with the AP over his "HOPE" poster. progressoid Apr 2014 #18

Yeah but Fairey was selling his. dilby Apr 2014 #20

You never know. I bet there are poeple out there willing to buy that crap. progressoid Apr 2014 #21

Painting a photograph, doesn't that fall under "Fair use" clause of copyright law bobduca Apr 2014 #19

why does it remind me of this? corkhead Apr 2014 #23

That's how George Zimmerman does his too. PeteSelman Apr 2014 #28

zimmerman came to my mind, too grasswire Apr 2014 #29

Dubya is as good a painter as he was a world leader... n/t backscatter712 Apr 2014 #30

Hah! Your post tops them all. Agreed! nt brush Apr 2014 #32

Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2014 #33

Bush is both stupid and lazy Gothmog Apr 2014 #34

I wonder if that critic had heard about this copyright Sister to TxTowelie Apr 2014 #37

He's incapable of original thought, original vision for his "art." Sister to TxTowelie Apr 2014 #35

Then let's hope he Googled Santorum WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2014 #36

This falls under the doctrine of "parodic fair use" jmowreader Apr 2014 #38

the paintings themselves are ok, but it's just like him and his lack of depth JI7 Apr 2014 #42