An Analysis Of Patrick Cariou s Canal Zone - 1722 Words

Copyright involves the exclusive legal right to reproduce, publish, sell, or distribute the matter and form of something (as a literary, musical, or artistic work). This enables the creator of such item to have insurance that no one else can steal or replicate their idea. Copyright has seen some of the largest court cases of all time where companies have sued millions due to breaches of copyright. A French photographer, Patrick Cariou, published a book Yes, Rasta (Powerhouse) for a show at Gagosian Galleryphotographs. The images were of a Rastafarian community in Jamaica. In 2008 Richard Prince created Canal Zone, which were a series of art works incorporating Cariou s photographs of the Rastafarian Community. Prince s works†¦show more content†¦In April 2013 The SDNY found that most of Prince s works were deemed to be transformative of the original works to an observer and consequently in fair use. In particular, the Court found that the lower court erred in requiring that the appropriating artist claim to be commenting on the original work, and found works to be transformative if they presented a new aesthetic. The court found 25 of Prince’s works to be transformative fair use under fair use. Cariou and Prince have since settled the case. Defamation or Libel is a false statement or accusation that harms the reputation of an individual person, business and much more. In regards to journalism there have been numerous cases in the UK of a newspaper organisations publishing an article or an image that could be seen as defamatory to those involved. This has led to numerous court cases against these media outlets due to the defamatory nature of the publication. For example, in 2011, Comedian Frankie Boyle, sued The Daily Mirror after describing him as ‘racist comedian’. Boyle said the paper defamed him with an article that was published in on 19 July 2011. Boyle claimed that the defamatory article cost him his job on the BBC panel show Mock The Week. The Daily Mirror defended the article they published by claiming it that the racist description was either true or honest comment on a matter of public interest