The creator of a famous Obama campaign poster is now in trouble with the Associated Press for his use of an AP photograph to create the piece (You can find the original photo and the famous "Hope" poster side by side in the below article). NOTE: This isn't an Obama thread, it's a copyright/Fair use thread. Here's the article: Yahoo! News Personally, I think the AP is blowing steam out their ears. I'm not Picaso or anything, but I took a lot of art classes for easy grades to boost my GPA in high school and I did learn some things. I find that Fairey's piece is so different from the original photo, that the AP has no real claim to the poster he made, even if the photo was used as a basis for the work. He completely changed everything but the outline of Obama's face. He changed the texture the color and even the message of the picture from a simple "here's the guy we're talking about in dramatic pose" to a political statement that's swept in like the peace sign. There's even content in the poster not in the original photo (the lapel pin). With so many changes it's a whole new piece of work. Lots of art works are created in a similar manner (I have a painting I painted by splicing pieces of other painting together hanging on my wall). It's common in the art word for an artist to take photos off the net and make changes to them. Usually this falls under fair use doctrine even if the painting is latter sold for profit. The AP want's compensation, while Fairey and his attorney says that the new piece falls under the fair use doctrine. What do you guys think? Is it fair use or copyright infringement or neither?