Just read this and wondered what everybody else thought:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...pyright-breach

Prince's adaptation brings into question where the line between copyright infringement and fair use is. I think the exposure for analog photographers to situations like this one would tend to be that of original creators and would probably lead to a bias against Prince. I'm on the fence regarding wether or not his work can be considered original or not.

I definitely didn't like Prince's lawyer arguing that Cariou's photos were "mere compilations of facts arranged with minimum creativity" WTF. Drawing scribbles on someone else's work is though?

I'm also wondering if the destruction of the works was Cariou's request in the lawsuit or the judges order. It isn't clear from the article and I'm not familiar enough with copyright law to know who decides the penalty in such cases. I'm used to the plaintiffs asking for tons o' dough so I'm guessing it was Cariou's. I'da gone for the payday. All in singles so I could fill a pool with it and pull a Scrooge McDuck.

Any thoughts,

Raul