appropriation art is illegal and unethical essay

Appropriation Art vs. Copyright Law: A Recent Setback for the Promotion of the Arts

By Peter Fay, JD '23

The Second and Ninth Circuits have  consistently led the way  in establishing the scope of American copyright law. In the past few years, the Second Circuit in particular has had the difficult task of reconciling copyright law with appropriation art, an artistic style predicated on the  intentional use of preexisting images and objects . The user alters the original works to create a new aesthetic experience and/or meaning. 

While a popular and respected form of art , appropriation art’s essence – the purposeful use of preexisting works – makes it especially susceptible to claims of copyright infringement. Outside of consent from the original work’s author, the best legal defense for appropriation art is the doctrine of fair use. However, as appropriation artists have  experimented with increasingly minimalistic changes  to the works they appropriate, this doctrine has proven to be an unreliable shield. Appropriation artists looking to explore the substantial effects that subtle alterations can have on art find themselves at odds with the fair use doctrine’s mandate that unauthorized use of preexisting works be “transformative.” Finding the proper overlap between minimalistic alterations and transformativeness is difficult, but it is a codification that has considerable implications for future appropriation art. Unfortunately, the most recent Second Circuit decision on the matter suggests this overlap is small to nonexistent, impeding the promotion of appropriation art. 

Andy Warhol Found. for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith,  No. 19-2420-cv, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 25277 (2d Cir. Mar. 26, 2021) resulted from a dispute over a series of silkscreen prints made by Andy Warhol. The prints were based on a photograph taken and copyright protected by Lynn Goldsmith in 1981 of the famous musician Prince. While Goldsmith had licensed the Prince photograph to be used by Andy Warhol for a piece commissioned by Vanity Fair in 1984, the license ended there. Warhol, however, continued to make fifteen additional works based on Goldsmith’s photograph. These additional pieces would only come to Goldsmith’s attention after Prince’s death in 2016. As the successor to the rights of the Prince Series, the Andy Warhol Foundation moved for a declaratory judgment while Goldsmith sued for copyright infringement.

The district court concluded that the Prince Series was transformative and thus fair use, going through the  1976 Copyright Act’s four-step test  but relying primarily on the purported change of purpose in the piece: the aesthetic change from a black and white photograph to a colorful silkscreen print transformed Prince from a self-conscious musician to a proud world-renowned rockstar. 

The Second Circuit disagreed, arguing that the district court had forgone the proper objective assessment of purpose and character for a ”subjective evaluation of the underlying artist message.” Underlying the circuit court’s ruling is a concern that an evaluative standard would weaken copyright protection by allowing appropriators of preexisting works to throw out any feasible change in purpose as a fair use justification. The circuit court also stated that judges are ill-suited to engage in artistic evaluation. Ultimately the Second Circuit concluded that a proper transformation under fair use occurs when the secondary work displays more than the user’s artistic style imposed on the original author’s work.

While I understand the Second Circuit’s desire for a more consistent transformativeness standard, I am skeptical this ruling will create the clarity the court seeks. Art is an innately subjective form of human expression; the experience and reaction of one spectator to a given artwork will regularly be different from that of another spectator. The Second Circuit even admits as much, dismissing that the purpose of work can be pinpointed based on the intent of the author or the opinion of a critic. So why are we kidding ourselves that there is one objective assessment of art? Labeling an inquiry into something as subjective as the purpose and character of art does not suddenly ensure the inquiry is objective. 

The Second Circuit would have better served both doctrinal clarity and the promotion of the arts by leaving in place the transformativeness standard it expressed in its last major appropriation art case,  Cariou v. Prince , 714 F.3d 694 (2d Cir. 2013). In that case, the Second Circuit asserted that the critical question of transformativeness is how the work “may reasonably be perceived.” This reasonable observer standard is subjective but restrained: it affords the understanding that there are multiple reasonable interpretations of art while also excluding abuse of fair use with fringe explanations. Had the Second Circuit stuck with this standard, Andy Warhol’s Prince Series and its palpable celebration of Prince as a larger-than-life figure would have been protected under fair use. 

The good news for appropriation artists is that the  Andy   Warhol Foundation  case has been  appealed to the Supreme Court , with the Warhol Foundation arguing that the Second Circuit’s judgment disregarded the Court’s decision in  Google LLC v. Oracle Am. ,  Inc. , 141 S. Ct. 1183 (2021). For now, however, appropriation artists will likely need to think twice about the magnitude of alterations they are making to original works. 

8 thoughts on “Appropriation Art vs. Copyright Law: A Recent Setback for the Promotion of the Arts”

… [Trackback]

[…] Find More to that Topic: jipel.law.nyu.edu/appropriation-art-vs-copyright-law-a-recent-setback-for-the-promotion-of-the-arts/ […]

[…] There you will find 75202 more Info on that Topic: jipel.law.nyu.edu/appropriation-art-vs-copyright-law-a-recent-setback-for-the-promotion-of-the-arts/ […]

[…] Information on that Topic: jipel.law.nyu.edu/appropriation-art-vs-copyright-law-a-recent-setback-for-the-promotion-of-the-arts/ […]

[…] Find More Information here on that Topic: jipel.law.nyu.edu/appropriation-art-vs-copyright-law-a-recent-setback-for-the-promotion-of-the-arts/ […]

[…] Here you will find 27287 more Info on that Topic: jipel.law.nyu.edu/appropriation-art-vs-copyright-law-a-recent-setback-for-the-promotion-of-the-arts/ […]

[…] Read More to that Topic: jipel.law.nyu.edu/appropriation-art-vs-copyright-law-a-recent-setback-for-the-promotion-of-the-arts/ […]

[…] Here you will find 32823 additional Information to that Topic: jipel.law.nyu.edu/appropriation-art-vs-copyright-law-a-recent-setback-for-the-promotion-of-the-arts/ […]

[…] Find More here to that Topic: jipel.law.nyu.edu/appropriation-art-vs-copyright-law-a-recent-setback-for-the-promotion-of-the-arts/ […]

Comments are closed.

Appropriating Copyrighted Works: When Is It Legal?

When an artist uses a copyrighted work and creates something new, it can fall under a fair use exception in the law.

Find out more about Copyrights

by   Brette Sember, J.D.

Brette is a former attorney and has been a writer and editor for more than 25 years. She is the author of more than 4...

Read more...

Updated on: July 30, 2024 · 4 min read

What is appropriation art?

Fair use exception, steps for appropriation artists.

Appropriation of a copyright is a type of plagiarism that applies to a work of art. Anytime you create a work of art—writing, music, computer coding, or other creative output—you immediately own the copyright for that work.

You are not required to  file for a copyright  with the United States Copyright Office to establish ownership (it automatically exists). However, filing for a copyright gives you the right to enforce the copyright in court.

A  copyright  is valid for your lifetime plus 70 years (other rules apply to older art and works created in other countries). During that time, no one else is allowed to use the work of art without permission unless the use falls within several categories that are considered valid exceptions. When art is appropriated, it has been used in a new work without the artist's permission. This may or may not violate the original artist's copyright.

In the genre of art known as appropriation art, artists intentionally take another artist's work and change, build on, or modify it in their own work. The famous Campbell's soup art by Andy Warhol is an example of appropriation art. Campbell's owns the image on the can labels. Warhol took that image and incorporated it into his own work, creating something new and unique.

Artists freely admit being influenced by other artists—but you should be aware of the distinction between  copyright violation  and creative appropriation.

One exception to copyright is fair use. Several types of fair use allow an artist to use another's copyrighted work. One common example is parody. Weird Al Yankovic has based his career on taking well-known songs and creating parodies, his own funny versions of the songs. This is one example of fair use. Other examples include news reporting, research, and criticism in which part of the original work is repeated. Appropriation art can also sometimes be considered fair use.

Courts have laid out four things to consider when determining whether a use falls under the fair use exception:

• Commercial use.  Courts consider whether the appropriation of the artwork creates a commercial benefit for the new artist. It's one thing to take a piece of art and alter it and hang it in your own home and another thing to appropriate it and then sell it for millions of dollars.
• Nature of the work.  Courts consider the nature of the new work. In the case of appropriation art, the new work is generally another piece of art.
• Amount of use.  The amount of the original art that is used in the appropriation piece is also considered. If an artist took an existing photograph, cut out a section, and used it in their own new work, the amount of use is small. However, if a 20-square-foot photograph is used as the basis for a piece of art in which it is painted over, most or all of the work is used.
• Effect on the market.  This factor looks at how the new use of the work affects the original work's market value. If the new work is truly transformative, it should have little or no impact on the original work's value. For example, if an artist makes T-shirts with her own designs, then a second artist takes those T-shirts and adds sequins in a few places, the sale of the sequined shirts will likely impact the sale of the original shirts because it is not transformative. This is the most important factor to consider when evaluating appropriation art.

If you are an artist who wishes to appropriate someone else's art into your own work, the first thing to do is reach out to the artist and ask permission. The artist may grant you permission or may be willing to license the work to you for a small fee. This can help you avoid any legal challenges.

If you are not given permission, or do not feel comfortable asking for permission, the best bet is to make sure that your use of the original work is truly transformative. For example, if you took a copy of a Jackson Pollack painting and placed it on the floor, and created an interactive display of laser lights on the ceiling as an art installation, you aren't doing anything at all to actually transform the painting.

However, if you took the same painting and sliced it into one-inch pieces, and used a papier-mâché technique to create a polar bear out of them, that would completely transform the work. The more transformative the new work, the more likely it is going to be considered fair use if there is a legal challenge.

Artists have always been influenced by others' art. Making sure your work truly creates something new out of the old work is the key to avoiding a  copyright infringement  issue.

You may also like

What Does 'Inc.' Mean in a Company Name?

'Inc.' in a company name means the business is incorporated, but what does that entail, exactly? Here's everything you need to know about incorporating your business.

October 9, 2023 · 10min read

How to Get an LLC and Start a Limited Liability Company

Considering an LLC for your business? The application process isn't complicated, but to apply for an LLC, you'll have to do some homework first.

July 29, 2024 · 11min read

What Is a Power of Attorney (POA)? A Comprehensive Guide

Setting up a power of attorney to make your decisions when you can't is a smart thing to do because you never know when you'll need help from someone you trust.

July 28, 2024 · 16min read

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Numismatics
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Social History
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Legal System - Costs and Funding
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Restitution
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Social Issues in Business and Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Social Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Sustainability
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• Ethnic Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Politics of Development
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Qualitative Political Methodology
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Disability Studies
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

6 Taking Pictures: Appropriation Art, Copyright, and Intentionalism

• Published: February 2018
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter presents appropriation art as a seemingly paradoxical renunciation and reinforcement of artistic authority. It then turns to the established philosophical debate surrounding interpretive intentionalism in light of the 2008 lawsuit between photographer Patrick Cariou and the contemporary appropriation artist Richard Prince. This case illustrates the essential role that intentionalism plays in deciding copyright suits. It then considers the philosophical problems surrounding the legal status of appropriation art. A number of scholars have proposed ways for the courts to accommodate appropriation art without eroding copyright protections for authors. It considers some recent proposals and rejects them. It then argues that appropriation art should be considered derivative and hence presumptively unfair .

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

The Appropriateness of Appropriating Appropriation Art

Institute of Museum Ethics,

Seton Hall University First Biennial Graduate Student Conference

Walter G. Lehmann,

George Washington University

PRESENTATION

Thank you for the opportunity to present as part of the Institute of Museum EthicsGraduate Student Conference.

I’ve come up with a catchy new title for my presentation “The Appropriateness of Appropriating Appropriation Art” – I think that nifty bit of alliteration about sums it up. The acquisition of works of appropriation art raise puzzling legal and ethical questions for collecting museums. [SLIDE 2] Works such as Shepard Fairey’s campaign portrait of President Barack Obama, a version of which was acquired by the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery in January [SLIDE 3] and is now on public display [SLIDE 4], may violate the intellectual property rights of others. In fact, Fairey recently admitted that he mislead his own attorneys about the source of the underlying image – a photograph taken by AP photographer Mannie Garcia.

Now, a great deal of attention – hand-wringing some might say – has been devoted to the appropriateness of acquiring and displaying works with a questionable past – artworks with Nazi-era provenance, illicit antiquities, and works of national cultural heritage. In fact some of the speakers here today have touched on these concerns. However, judging from the reaction to the acquisition and display of works like Fairey’s HOPE portrait, it appears that the museum profession may not fully appreciate the implications of dealing in works which may infringe on the intellectual property rights of others. This is particularly troubling since, as I will argue, the acquisition and loan policies of most major American museums clearly prohibit dealing in works which are entangled in intellectual property disputes.

Okay, so consciously incorporating existing work into a new work is part of the post-modern art form known as “appropriation art”. Appropriation art borrows images and ideas from popular culture, advertising, mass media, and other artists, and incorporates them into new works of art. From the artists perspective this is an essential part of the artistic process – something that has gone on since the dawn of time – and legal constraints are a threat to artistic freedom. But from the perspective of intellectual property law, the appropriation of protected works without permission from the owner is – quite simply – a form of theft.

Now unfortunately – or perhaps fortunately, depending on your point of view – we don’t have time to delve into the intricacies of intellectual property law today. Suffice it to say that intellectual property laws govern rights in a wide variety of creative works. In addition to copyrights, trademarks, patents and trade secrets, personal property rights such as the right of publicity and the right to privacy, can conceivably be subject to appropriation in a work of art.

The legal protection afforded to these intellectual property rights vary from country to country. To the extent that the rights to the appropriated material are not subject to protection under applicable law, legal concerns about infringement are not at issue. But the law does not give artists any special privilege to use protected works without first seeking permission from the copyright owner. Let me repeat that – the artist must ask permission to use a work that is protected by intellectual property law.

Not surprisingly then, of the four major schools of postmodern art, Appropriation Art has proven to be the most problematic from an intellectual property perspective. Works by Warhol, Rauschenberg and Koons have all been the subject of intellectual property disputes. Newer artists such as Sherri Levine, David Salle, Susan Pitt, and most recently Shepard Fairey, have made the incorporation of protected works in their own work – without first seeking permission – a central element of their artistic statement.

As I mentioned in opening, the National Portrait Gallery acquired a version of Fairey’s HOPE portrait in January. It was a gift to the Museum from Washington art collectors Heather and Tony Podesta. The work – a stencil and hand-drawn illustration over a collage of newspaper clippings, is one of three original fine art pieces created by Fairey based on the print version circulated during the 2008 campaign.

In a National Portrait Gallery podcast, Fairey explains that he got permission from the Obama campaign to use Barack Obama’s image but that the campaign had expressed concerns about using the underlying photograph without permission. In another Gallery podcast, Deputy Director, Carolyn Carr says that the image was “[quote] originally appropriated from a photograph [unquote]” and likened the work to a Matthew Brady photograph of Abraham Lincoln also in the Gallery’s collection.

Since the end of the campaign, Fairey’s work has attracted more and more attention. A retrospective of Fairey’s work, including another version of the HOPE portrait, opened at Boston’s Institute of Contemporary Art in February -- which is where I saw it and first framed the topic of this presentation. The portrait is now on display at the Andy Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh.

Acquisitions by the National Portrait Gallery are determined by a commission based on staff recommendations. Deputy Director Carr explained to me in an email that “[quote] significance of the object is of paramount importance [unquote]” and that from the Gallery’s collecting point of view “[quote] this was THE campaign image. It was ubiquitous. [unquote]” When I pressed her on whether the Gallery had considered the implications of this acquisition from an intellectual property perspective, however, Deputy Director Carr noted that the case was in litigation and that the Gallery would not comment until the case is settled.

It is presumed that, as public institutions, museums operate in a world that is as much, perhaps even more so, governed by the court of public opinion as opposed to the court of law. Museums are a reflection of the societies in which they exist. Their reputations depend on maintaining the highest ethical standards. As a result, museums must weigh the ethical implications of their actions to a far greater extent than their private counterparts – dealers, collectors and donors.

Chief among the issues debated under the rubric of acquisition ethics are questions pertaining to the provenance of Nazi-era loot, antiquities, and objects of cultural heritage. The ethical issues surrounding these types of collections are familiar to students of museum studies. They involve situations where the objects in question have been – or are susceptible of being – looted, stolen or otherwise taken without permission of the presumptive owner.

While they may have been acquired on technically legal grounds, it is the way in which they become available for acquisition that raises ethical concerns. The nature of the evidence and the degree of proof necessary to demonstrate that the provenance of a given object is clouded by suspicious circumstances is subject to debate. However, there is general agreement that museums should not condone or promote illegal or unethical behavior, and that by acquiring, exhibiting or otherwise trafficking in works that may have been improperly acquired, museums are perpetuating the wrongful acts associated with these works. Some even argue that by doing so, museums contribute to or encourage further illicit activities.

In response to these concerns, the principal museum organizations, including ICOM, AAM and AAMD, have provided general guidance with respect to museum acquisition practices and have issued specific policies to address collecting in the areas of Nazi-era provenance, antiquities and cultural heritage. These policies reflect the ethical principles on which there is general agreement by museum professionals.

Most major museums have institutionalized these ethical guidelines as part of their own policies. The acquisition and loan policies of most major museums now contain general guidance on conducting provenance research. Often this general guidance is presented along with specific guidance regarding particular collecting areas. Some major museums go as far as to profess a “clear title” standard for acquisitions. Broadly defined, “clear title” means that the object is free from all claims and disputed interests. For example, MOMA’s collections management policy, adopted in March of this year, requires that among other things the curator recommending an acquisition or loan must “[quote] make all reasonable inquires to determine (a) that the Museum can obtain clear title if a purchase or gift is contemplated or (b) that a proposed lender has clear title at the time that the loan is made [unquote].” The J. Paul Getty Museum policy, adopted in 2008, is even more direct: “[quote] No object will be acquired without assurance that valid and legal title can be transferred [unquote].” Similarly, the Metropolitan Museum’s policy states: “[quote] The Museum shall rigorously research the provenance of a work of art prior to acquisition to determine that the Museum can acquire clear title [unquote].”

Clearing intellectual property rights is standard practice in the media world. Content providers are routinely required to provide proof that they have acquired all necessary intellectual property rights in a work and to provide both warranties and errors and omissions insurance to protect the entity acquiring the work. In museums on the other hand, rights clearance has traditionally been limited to the licensing of photographic reproductions of museum collections. However, the “clear title” requirements contained in major museum acquisitions policies suggest that museum’s are obligated under their own policies to consider the ownership of intellectual property rights as part of their acquisition and loan decisions.

Would a dispute over intellectual property rights in a work – such as a dispute over copyright ownership – be sufficient to prevent the acquisition or loan of the work under the clear title requirements contained in these major museum acquisition policies? Since the more extreme types of appropriation art such as Fairey’s HOPE portrait involve the admitted use of copyright-protected images without permission, it would appear that these clear title provisions prohibit, prima facie, the acquisition or display of such works until legal disputes involving copyright infringement are settled.

There are those who dismiss concerns about the infringement of intellectual property rights by appropriation artists such as Fairey as excessive moralizing. These apologists are quick to point out the long history of the relationship between the creative process and the appropriation of images and ideas created by others. However there is a clear legal and ethical distinction between permitted and impermissible appropriation.

Is there a double standard being applied by museums to works which may violate the intellectual property rights of others – a perception, perhaps, that such intangible rights are somehow different and less important than other forms of property rights? Does the “significance” of a work outweighs the circumstances under which it is created, and the legal and ethical responsibilities of the acquiring museum? Are museums that knowingly acquire or display such works accomplices of the appropriation artist? [Slide 5].

If it is okay for museums to acquire and exhibit works that infringe on the intellectual property rights of others, where does this lead? Although I am no artist, I can easily imagine a work of art that violates private rights – a work which invades a person’s privacy perhaps, or, even more troubling, one that exploits children. Should such works be acquired or displayed by museums? I certainly hope not.

Museums need to take seriously their legal and ethical obligation to thoroughly investigate provenance regardless of the type or origin of the work, to investigate the legal and ethical implications of acquiring each work, and, wherever possible, to ensure that acquisition or exhibition of the work does not come at the expense of another’s rights. In situations such as Fairey’s HOPE portrait, the solution would seem quite simple –acquisition and display should be deferred until pending claims are resolved. Once they are, then it is entirely appropriate for a museum to acquire or exhibit the work.

LEHMANN STROBEL PC   3613 Anton Farms Road   Baltimore Maryland 21208   (443) 352-8635      [email protected]

Home    |    Services    |    About Us    |    Resources    |    Articles    |    Site Map    |    Terms of Use

Copyright and Appropriation Art: Recent Legal Controversies

Comments or corrections.

So, you've spotted an error or would like to make a comment on this article? Just fill out our form here and we'll get back to you as soon as we can.

• Tools & Resources
• appropriation
• exceptions and limitations
• Associated Press
• Bridgeman Art Library
• Chapman Kelley
• Gagosian Gallery
• legal dispute
• Richard Prince
• Shepard Fairey

McCombs School of Business

• Español ( Spanish )

Videos Concepts Unwrapped View All 36 short illustrated videos explain behavioral ethics concepts and basic ethics principles. Concepts Unwrapped: Sports Edition View All 10 short videos introduce athletes to behavioral ethics concepts. Ethics Defined (Glossary) View All 58 animated videos - 1 to 2 minutes each - define key ethics terms and concepts. Ethics in Focus View All One-of-a-kind videos highlight the ethical aspects of current and historical subjects. Giving Voice To Values View All Eight short videos present the 7 principles of values-driven leadership from Gentile's Giving Voice to Values. In It To Win View All A documentary and six short videos reveal the behavioral ethics biases in super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff's story. Scandals Illustrated View All 30 videos - one minute each - introduce newsworthy scandals with ethical insights and case studies. Video Series

Concepts Unwrapped UT Star Icon

Appropriation & Attribution

Attribution is giving credit where credit is due. Appropriation is the complex borrowing of ideas, images, symbols, sounds, and identity from others.

Discussion Questions

1. What is the relationship between attribution and appropriation? How are they similar? How are they different?

2. The video acknowledges that artistic progress may not be possible without incorporating important developments from the past. Do you agree? Why or why not?

3. How can artists use others’ creative works in an ethical manner? When is appropriation unethical?

4. Case law suggests that someone cannot claim intellectual property rights after throwing away the original work. Do you agree with this position? Why or why not?

5. Have you ever pirated or copied works protected by copyright? What harms did you cause? Do you feel you were ethically justified to do so? Why or why not?

6. Think of an example of something you consider to be a “rip-off” and something you think is an innovative repurposing of another’s work. What makes them different? Could your conclusions be shaped by your own interests?

7. Fair use is a doctrine that allows for limited use of copyrighted materials without acquiring permission, for purposes such as teaching, journalism, parody, or critique. Do you agree with these parameters? Are there other instances that should constitute fair use?

8. According to the terms and conditions of YouTube, the company says it may use any works uploaded as it chooses, but will not claim credit for creation of the piece. Do you think this is ethically permissible? Why or why not? Would you feel comfortable with YouTube using a video you created in an advertisement for the company?

Case Studies

Blurred Lines of Copyright

Marvin Gaye’s Estate won a lawsuit against Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams for the hit song “Blurred Lines,” which had a similar feel to one of his songs.

Appropriating “Hope”

Fairey’s portrait of Barack Obama raised debate over the extent to which an artist can use and modify another’s artistic work, yet still call it one’s own.

Christina Fallin: “Appropriate Culturation?”

After Fallin posted a picture of herself wearing a Plain’s headdress on social media, uproar emerged over cultural appropriation and Fallin’s intentions.

Teaching Notes

This video introduces the general ethics concepts of appropriation and attribution. Attribution is giving credit where credit is due. Appropriation is the complex borrowing of ideas, images, symbols, sounds, and identity from others.

Cultural appropriation is the use of elements of one culture by another culture, such as music, dress, imagery, or behavior and ceremony. To learn more about this in relation to stereotypes and media representations watch Representation .

Issues of artistic and intellectual attribution are often related to copyright laws and intellectual property policies. For a better understanding of the relationship between law and ethics, watch Legal Rights & Ethical Responsibilities .

Appropriating or using others’ work without proper attribution can cause reputational and financial harm, among others. To learn more about various types of harm, watch Causing Harm .

The case studies covered on this page explore issues of cultural appropriation, artistic appropriation, and legal and artistic attribution. “Christina Fallin: “Appropriate Culturation?”” examines the intentions of a musician after she posted a controversial picture on social media and was criticized of cultural appropriation. “Appropriating “Hope”” details the trial over Shepard Fairey’s portrait of Barack Obama and the extent to which an artist can use and modify another’s artistic work. ““Blurred Lines” of Copyright” examines the legal debates over proper attribution in the Marvin Gaye Estate’s lawsuit against Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams.

Terms defined in our ethics glossary that are related to the video and case studies include: diffusion of responsibility, integrity, justice, morals, self-serving bias, and values.

For more information on concepts covered in this and other videos, as well as activities to help think through these concepts, see Deni Elliott’s workbook  Ethical Challenges: Building an Ethics Toolkit , which may be downloaded for free as a PDF. This workbook explores what ethics is and what it means to be ethical, offering readers a variety of exercises to identify their own values and reason through ethical conflicts.

Additional Resources

Askegaard, Søren, and Giana M. Eckhardt. 2012. “Glocal Yoga: Re-appropriation in the Indian Consumptionscape.” Marketing Theory 12 (1): 45-60.

Berson, Josh. 2010. “Intellectual Property and Cultural Appropriation.” Reviews in Anthropology 39 (3): 201-228.

Craig, David. 2006. “Description and Attribution.” In The Ethics of the Story: Using Narrative Techniques Responsibly in Journalism . Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing.

Lessig, Lawrence. 2008. Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy . New York: The Penguin Press.

Luke, Belinda, and Kate Kearins. 2012. “Attribution of Words versus Attribution of Responsibilities: Academic Plagiarism and University Practice.” Organization 19 (6): 881-889.

Merryman, John Henry, Albert E. Elsen, and Stephen K. Urice. 2014. Law, Ethics, and the Visual Arts . Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.

Ursin, Reanna A. 2014. “Cultural Appropriation for Mainstream Consumption: The Musical Adaptation of Dessa Rose .” Mosaic: A Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature 47 (1): 91-109.

Young, James O., and Conrad G. Brunk (Editors). 2009. The Ethics of Cultural Appropriation . Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Transcript of Narration

Written and Narrated by

Deni Elliott , Ph.D., M.A. Department of Journalism & Media Studies College of Arts and Sciences The University of South Florida at St. Petersburg

“As young children, we learned that everyone has the right to control the use of their property. Keep it, share it, give it away; it seemed that simple. But as adults, we find ourselves trying to navigate through physical and virtual worlds, where issues of intellectual property and ownership are much more complex. Much of what is ethical and unethical in the area of intellectual property has to do with following the law. While laws governing appropriation and attribution are struggling to keep up and add clarity in our rapidly evolving world, ethical analysis can help guide the way.

Attribution means giving credit where credit is due. In theory, the author of any published work has a right to control how his or her intellectual property is used. But in practice, most people click agree when signing on to websites such as YouTube without ever being aware that they’re signing over their rights to their material to the corporation that owns the site.

We all know that we’re not supposed to plagiarize our papers. But what about artists or musicians who learn their craft by copying famous predecessors? Would we call that stealing? Or influence?

Music professor and computer scientist David Cope created a computer program that produces “original” compositions in the style of Mozart or Bach, for instance, but it’s not. Two CDs have been produced and sold with no legal action taken because the copyrights to the individual works expired long ago.

In another case, Composer John Oswald created sound collages, using samples of previously recorded works. He claimed that the sound collages were original compositions. He listed all his sources, but did not get permissions to use them. Record companies filed lawsuits, and ultimately, unsold copies of his albums were destroyed.

Ethically speaking, using others’ intellectual property for one’s own gain without permission is stealing. But appropriation is more complex. Appropriation can mean borrowing ideas, images, symbols, sounds and identity from others. Many would argue that progress in art, music, and architecture wouldn’t even be possible without incorporating important artistic developments of the past.

Sometimes appropriation is ethically permissible and other times not. For example, many of our government buildings and banks have appropriated ancient Greek architectural features, such as columns and capitals, to project images we associate with democracy, wealth, and freedom. On the other hand, controversial instances of cultural appropriation abound, such as the NFL’s use of Native American symbols like the logo for the Washington Redskins.

When it comes to appropriation and attribution, the laws may still be murky, but ethical behavior doesn’t have to be. If what you want to use doesn’t belong to you, then use it only in ways that the owner permits. If it’s impossible to ask for permission, then ask yourself how you would want the creation to be used or attributed if it were your own. And if ownership itself is the subject of debate, then the use should be subjected to a systematic moral analysis to determine what harms the appropriation might cause and whether they are justified.”

Stay Informed

Support our work.

Ethics and Artistic Appropriation

← Media Ethics

Researchers

Scott R. Stroud

Program Director of Media Ethics, Knight Faculty Fellow

Morgan Malouf

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter

CASE STUDY: Taking Charging Bull by the Horns

Case study pdf | additional case studies.

In the wake of the global stock market crash of 1987, the Sicilian immigrant Arturo Di Modica created the guerilla artwork known as Charging Bull . Without permission, and after spending $350,000 of his own funds, Di Modica had the bull installed in 1989 near Wall Street in New York City during the height of Christmas season to symbolize the strength and power of the American people. Many tourists and locals alike loved the Charging Bull and identified it as “the only significant work of guerrilla capitalist art in existence.” The New York Stock Exchange quickly removed the 3.5-ton statue the day it was installed, but the resulting public outcry led to its “temporary installation” in a nearby location; thirty years later, Charging Bull is still standing strong as one of the most iconic symbols of New York City. On March 7, 2017, Charging Bull was faced with a new opponent.

During the night before International Women’s Day in March 2017, a small sculpture of a young girl was quietly placed in front of Charging Bull . Known as Fearless Girl , the unscheduled installation stands defiantly with her hands on her hips and faces the bull with an unwavering confidence. At the feet of the statue was a bronze plaque that reads “Know the power of women in leadership. SHE makes a difference.” The initial reaction from many people was that this was another act of guerrilla art, one particularly needed now given Wall Street’s challenges with gender equity and diversity. The work’s sculptor, Kristen Visbal, further enabled such a reading explaining her work: “She’s not angry at the bull, she’s confident, she knows what she’s capable of and she’s wanting the bull to take note.” But looks can be deceiving. State Street Global Advisors, a prominent financial firm which oversees $2.5 trillion in assets, invested in Fearless Girl to promote their “Gender Diversity Index,” a fund that “invests in U.S. large-capitalization companies that rank among the highest in their sector in achieving gender diversity across senior leadership.” The use of “SHE” in the inspirational plaque quotation may be meant as a gender pronoun, but in its capitalized form it is also the NASDAQ ticker symbol for the promoted State Street Global Advisors fund. A Bloomberg report indicated that the statue generated an estimated $7.4 million in free marketing for the investment firm in the first two months after the statue’s installation. Arturo Di Modica was not consulted about the placement of Fearless Girl, and he did not share the same excitement of those who saw the installation of Fearless Girl as an amazing addition to the territory occupied by his Charging Bull . Di Modica demanded that Fearless Girl be removed and placed elsewhere because it takes away the power of his work, largely by reframing its meaning. His inspirational bull ceased to be the protagonist of the Wall Street story, and quickly became the antagonist in a larger drama—a representation of the Wall Street orthodoxy that is accused of holding women back from true equality in the world of business. The city removed Fearless Girl , but she was quickly placed back in front of the bull due to the resulting public uproar. Di Modica is still outraged and wants Fearless Girl gone. He claims that his bull is “for art,” while Fearless Girl is a manipulative marketing scheme orchestrated by a big firm. Other critics joined him in denouncing Fearless Girl as an act of “corporate feminism,” a “marketing coup,” and an advertising trick. The controversy centers on how art communicates and when reframing existing art is unethical or wrong. Fearless Girl would lose its meaning and importance without Charging Bull ; she would simply be a confident little girl, and not a statement about Wall Street’s gender problems. Di Modica argues that Fearless Girl harms the meaning of his artwork: by reframing or re-appropriating the meaning of Charging Bull through the addition of another statue, Di Modica’s work now seems tied to a meaning and significance he did not intend. Di Modica still owns Charging Bull and can move it if he so desires, but he has so far advocated for the removal of the more recently added statue that reframes his original work. Those who side with the creators of Fearless Girl believe that it is a valid instance of appropriation or re-appropriation in art, often a rich practice of reframing existing art or symbols in order for ostracized social and cultural groups to challenge the traditional social order or powerful organizations. When seen as a reaction to the iconic artistic symbol of Wall Street, the message Fearless Girl depicts to many viewers the message that women are extremely powerful, uplifting, and encouraging. While Di Modica was fighting to have the statue removed, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio joined the dispute, tweeting that “Men who don’t like women taking up space are exactly why we need the Fearless Girl .” Standing confident, unafraid and unwilling to back down, Fearless Girl ’s impact would not be as affective without Charging Bull . According to de Blasio, Fearless Girl asserts that “women were not going to live in fear, that women were going to teach their daughters and all the women in their lives to believe in themselves.” The company who backed Fearless Girl explains that they wanted to “raise awareness and drive a conversation around the need to improve gender diversity in corporate leadership roles.” They clearly succeeded to do so by using Fearless Girl to reframe the meaning of Charging Bull —but did their fearless pursuit of gender equality go too far?   Discussion Questions:

• Was Charging Bull ’s meaning changed by the addition of Fearless Girl ? Was the original work—or its artist— harmed in any way?
• Should Fearless Girl be placed elsewhere? Should she stay? If you advocate moving her to another location, would you insist on moving Charging Bull as well?
• Is it ethical for the creator of Fearless Girl to use another artist’s work as part of her own message or artwork? What if incorporating, reframing, or visibly critiquing a previous work was the only way to express the point an artist wanted to make?
• What ethical limits would you place on artists wanting to reframe the artworks produced by previous artists?
• Do the details concerning the artists and their funders matter to judgments about the aesthetic merits of each of these work? If these details changed, would your conclusions about the ethical and aesthetic worth of Fearless Girl change?

Further Information:  

Bill Eggbert, “Bullshift! City may try to move Charging Bull statue.” Downtown Express , March 1, 2018. Available at: http://www.downtownexpress.com/2018 /03/01/bullshift-city-may-try-to-move-charging-bull-statue/

Greg Fallis, “Seriously, the guy has a point.” April 14, 2017. Available at: https://gregfallis.com/2017/04/14/seriously-the-guy-has-a-point/

Lawrence Husick, “Ask Dr. Copyright about Fearless Girl and copyright appropriation.” May 5, 2017. Available at: http://garson-law.com/ask-dr-copyright-about-fearless-girl-and-copyright-appropriation/

Jill Mavro, “Driving gender diversity with a bold new statement.” March 7, 2017. Available at: http://blog.spdrs.com/post/driving-gender-diversity-with-a-bold-new-statement

Liam Stack, “‘ Fearless Girl ’ statue to stay in financial district (for now).” New York Times , March 27, 2017. Available at: h ttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/27/nyregion/fearless-girl-statue-de-b lasio.html

Morgan Malouf & Scott R. Stroud, Ph.D. Media Ethics Initiative University of Texas at Austin March 10, 2018

Cases produced by the Media Ethics Initiative remain the intellectual property of the Media Ethics Initiative and the University of Texas at Austin. They can be used in unmodified PDF form without permission for classroom use. For use in publications such as textbooks, readers, and other works, please contact the Media Ethics Initiative .

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Create an account

By clicking submit, I confirm that I agree to Cartellino Privacy Policy

• Oct. 16, 2019

What Is Appropriation Art And When Is It Okay?

• by Cielo Serale
• By Cielo Serale

More often than not, we see this term being thrown around in various media platforms. One way or another, people find a way to use this. It’s the reason why people are being canceled by online communities but the arts have been lenient with this word and it’s an element that has been pretty much a part of a lot of contemporary works. What on earth is appropriation; what counts as one and what makes it okay for artists to appropriate others?

To take something for one’s own use, usually without permission, is called “appropriation” and it can be used in a lot of aspects, including the ever-controversial topic of cultural appropriation . This type of appropriation takes a cultural identity into something more mundane or en vogue such as fashion. It’s easy to appropriate things but to identify whether or not it is appropriation is a little harder than you’d think it would be. In art, appropriation may not be as big of a deal that could cause a commotion in online communities. Japanese artist Yasumasa Morimura for one is known for appropriating a lot of artists and their works. Nam June Paik, known as the father of video art, has appropriated The Beatles concerts and presidential speeches in a collaboration with Jud Yalkut. And while political pop may sound like a genre of music, Wang Guangyi has been at the forefront of this movement, repurposing Chinese propaganda materials and tagging them with luxe brands. There’s one law that protects artists from copyright infringement in case appropriation takes place. It’s called fair use .

More often than not, we see this term being thrown around in various media platforms. One way or another, people find a way to use this. It&rsquo;s the reason why people are being canceled by online communities but the arts have been lenient with this word and it&rsquo;s an element that has been pretty much a part of a lot of contemporary works. What&rsquo;s on earth is appropriation; what counts as one and what makes it okay for artists to appropriate others?

To take something for one&rsquo;s own use, usually without permission, is called &ldquo;appropriation&rdquo; and it can be used in a lot of aspects, including the ever-controversial topic of cultural appropriation . This type of appropriation takes a cultural identity into something more mundane or en vogue such as fashion. It&rsquo;s easy to appropriate things but to identify whether or not it is appropriation is a little harder than you&rsquo;d think it would be. In art, appropriation may not be as big of a deal that could cause a commotion in online communities. Japanese artist Yasumasa Morimura for one is known for appropriating a lot of artists and their works. Nam June Paik, known as the father of video art, has appropriated The Beatles concerts and presidential speeches in a collaboration with Jud Yalkut. And while political pop may sound like a genre of music, Wang Guangyi has been at the forefront of this movement, repurposing Chinese propaganda materials and tagging them with luxe brands. There&rsquo;s one law that protects artists from copyright infringement in case appropriation takes place. It&rsquo;s called fair use .

What is fair use?

There are four factors to be considered to understand whether or not a work is under fair use. First, the purpose of the creation should be justified; is it commercial or political, maybe a commentary or for educational purposes? Second, the nature of the copyrighted work should be known, if it contains elements that are protected by other copyright clauses. Then, the amount and substantiality of the portion of the original work are measured. Lastly, the effect of the use on the market or a potential market for the original work is put into consideration.

Most of the time, the first factor is heavily referred to as it is what usually makes it okay to appropriate: purpose. A lot of appropriation art is a commentary on purpose just like Wang Guangyi’s works. Visual artists have continuously struggled with copyright issues when it comes to appropriation and just like everyone else, even the law is confused whether or not a work is protected under fair use. There will always be a question of authenticity and authorship in appropriation art. Even the safest means to counter any lawsuit such as credits could only add complications to what’s already convoluting the system.

Wang Guangyi, Great Criticism Series: Chanel | Photo courtesy of Curiator

Most of the time, the first factor is heavily referred to as it is what usually makes it okay to appropriate: purpose. A lot of appropriation art is a commentary on purpose just like Wang Guangyi&rsquo;s works. Visual artists have continuously struggled with copyright issues when it comes to appropriation and just like everyone else, even the law is confused whether or not a work is protected under fair use. There will always be a question of authenticity and authorship in appropriation art. Even the safest means to counter any lawsuit such as credits could only add complications to what&rsquo;s already convoluting the system.

Wang Guangyi, Great Criticism Series: Chanel |&nbsp;Photo courtesy of Curiator

• Appropriation Art
• Nam June Paik
• Yasumasa Morimura
• Wang Guangyi
• Collaborate with us
• Shipping & Returns
• Terms & Conditions
• Privacy Policy

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Code Switch

• School Colors
• Perspectives

• LISTEN & FOLLOW
• Apple Podcasts
• Amazon Music

Your support helps make our show possible and unlocks access to our sponsor-free feed.

Commentary: Cultural Appropriation Is, In Fact, Indefensible

K. Tempest Bradford

Elvis Presley, in the studio in 1956 — Presley's success was undoubtedly driven by the material he appropriated from black musicians. Bettmann Archive/Getty Images hide caption

Elvis Presley, in the studio in 1956 — Presley's success was undoubtedly driven by the material he appropriated from black musicians.

Last week, the New York Times published an op-ed titled "In Defense of Cultural Appropriation" in which writer Kenan Malik attempted to extol the virtues of artistic appropriation and chastise those who would stand in the way of necessary "cultural engagement." (No link, because you have Google and I'd rather not give that piece more traffic than it deserves.) What would have happened, he argues, had Elvis Presley not been able to swipe the sounds of black musicians?

Malik is not the first person to defend cultural appropriation. He joins a long list that, most recently, has included prominent members of the Canadian literary community and author Lionel Shriver.

But the truth is that cultural appropriation is indefensible. Those who defend it either don't understand what it is, misrepresent it to muddy the conversation, or ignore its complexity — discarding any nuances and making it easy to dismiss both appropriation and those who object to it.

At the start of the most recent debate , Canadian author Hal Niedzviecki called on the readers of Write magazine to "Write what you don't know ... Relentlessly explore the lives of people who aren't like you. ... Win the Appropriation Prize." Amid the outcry over this editorial, there were those who wondered why this statement would be objectionable. Shouldn't authors "write the Other?" Shouldn't there be more representative fiction?

Yes, of course. The issue here is that Niedzviecki conflated cultural appropriation and the practice of writing characters with very different identities from yourself — and they're not the same thing. Writing inclusive fiction might involve appropriation if it's done badly, but that's not a given.

Cultural appropriation can feel hard to get a handle on, because boiling it down to a two-sentence dictionary definition does no one any favors. Writer Maisha Z. Johnson offers an excellent starting point by describing it not only as the act of an individual, but an individual working within a " power dynamic in which members of a dominant culture take elements from a culture of people who have been systematically oppressed by that dominant group ."

That's why appropriation and exchange are two different things, Johnson says — there's no power imbalance involved in an exchange. And when artists appropriate, they can profit from what they take, while the oppressed group gets nothing.

Related NPR Stories

'Columbusing': The Art Of Discovering Something That Is Not New

Don't Call It 'The New Ramen': Why Pho Is Central To Vietnamese Identity

Dear white artists making music videos in india: step away from the 'holi' powder, author lionel shriver on cultural appropriation and the 'sensitivity police'.

I teach classes and seminars alongside author and editor Nisi Shawl on Writing the Other , and the foundation of our work is that authors should create characters from many different races, cultures, class backgrounds, physical abilities, and genders, even if — especially if — these don't match their own. We are not alone in this. You won't find many people advising authors to only create characters similar to themselves. You will find many who say: Don't write characters from minority or marginalized identities if you are not going to put in the hard work to do it well and avoid cultural appropriation and other harmful outcomes. These are different messages. But writers often see or hear the latter and imagine that it means the former. And editorials like Niedzviecki's don't help the matter.

Complicating things even further, those who tend to see appropriation as exchange are often the ones who profit from it.

Even Malik's example involving rock and roll isn't as simple as Elvis "stealing" from black artists. Before he even came along, systematic oppression and segregation in America meant black musicians didn't have access to the same opportunities for mainstream exposure, income, or success as white ones. Elvis and other rock and roll musicians were undoubtedly influenced by black innovators, but over time the genre came to be regarded as a cultural product created, perfected by, and only accessible to whites .

This is the "messy interaction" Malik breezes over in dismissing the idea of appropriation as theft: A repeating pattern that's recognizable across many different cultural spheres, from fashion and the arts to literature and food.

And this pattern is why cultures and people who've suffered the most from appropriation sometimes insist on their traditions being treated like intellectual property — it can seem like the only way to protect themselves and to force members of dominant or oppressive cultures to consider the impact of their actions.

This has lead to accusations of gatekeeping by Malik and others: Who has the right to decide what is appropriation and what isn't ? What does true cultural exchange look like? There's no one easy answer to either question.

But there are some helpful guidelines: The Australian Council for the Arts developed a set of protocols for working with Indigenous artists that lays out how to approach Aboriginal culture as a respectful guest, who to contact for guidance and permission, and how to proceed with your art if that permission is not granted. Some of these protocols are specific to Australia, but the key to all of them is finding ways for creativity to flourish while also reducing harm.

All of this lies at the root of why cultural appropriation is indefensible. It is, without question, harmful. It is not inherent to writing representational and inclusive fiction, it is not a process of equal and mutually beneficial exchange, and it is not a way for one culture to honor another. Cultural appropriation does damage, and it should be something writers and other artists work hard to avoid, not compete with each other to achieve.

For those who are willing to do that hard work, there are resources out there. When I lecture about this, I ask writers to consider whether they are acting as Invaders, Tourists, or Guests, according to the excellent framework Nisi Shawl lays out in her essay on appropriation . And then I point them towards all the articles and blog posts I've collected over time on the subject of cultural appropriation , to give them as full a background in understanding, identifying, and avoiding it as I possibly can.

Because I believe that, instead of giving people excuses for why appropriation can't be avoided (it can), or allowing them to think it's no big deal (it is), it's more important to help them become better artists whose creations contribute to cultural understanding and growth that benefits us all.

K. Tempest Bradford is a speculative fiction author, media critic, teacher, and podcaster. She teaches and lectures about writing inclusive fiction online and in person via WritingTheOther.com .

Fancy 10% off your first order?

Sign-up to our newsletter to receive notifications about new and exciting pieces of artwork. We will also let you know when we release new blog articles and competitions.

All this and 10% off your first order!

We hate spam as much as you do. We will not share or sell your information to anyone.

Exclusive Original Art Browse and discover some fantastic pieces of artwork

Multiple Sizes Easy to understand sizing to suit every wall space

Authentic Every piece comes with a certificate of authenticity

Free UK Delivery Carefully packed and delivered to your home or office

Appropriation in art – is it appropriate, or stealing?

It was once said “talent creates, genius steals”. But who said this, we aren’t 100 per cent sure. A quick Google search informs us that it could have been Oscar Wilde, T.S Elliot or even Picasso. To be honest though, it doesn’t really matter. What matters is the question of whether using someone else’s imagery, logo or trademark is considered ‘theft’ – or is there just cause behind the appropriation of others’ work?

Throughout modern art you can find many examples of artists using appropriation. From Marcel Duchamp’s cheekily moustachioed Mona Lisa, Andy Warhol’s Marilyn Monroe, Campbell’s Tomato Soup and Elvis Presley to the comic and cultural imagery used in Roy Lichenstein’s work and also Jeff Koon’s giant balloonesque sculptures.

More recently, artists such as Shephard Fairey (AKA Obey), Banksy and even our very own CreativeFolk artist Paul Kneen use appropriation to help get the point across. Paul explains: “Obviously if we were blatantly just ripping off someone else’s work then of course that’s theft, plagiarism and forgery. But to use elements of existing things to help make a point in our work has not only been done for years, it’s part of adding cultural references to our work. It adds another level, and allows the viewer to understand the message without a long-written explanation next to it.” Paul recently found himself in the cross hairs of Louis Vuitton for his piece ‘ Reality Cheque ’, having being accused of trademark violation. This was because the blanket in the painting features the Louis Vuitton pattern.

“To be honest – when I saw the email and the claims made, I was completely shocked and a little concerned. I thought I was in the right, but doubt set in and so I began researching the situation,” says Paul. After some thorough research, Paul came across a website that featured an article all about this legal issue. The website in question is www.medium.com . It has some very interesting information available regarding appropriation and the legalities under the term ‘fair use’. Within the article it goes on to state the following:

As a general rule of thumb, you can use trademarks freely for commentary and criticism. For example, an artist could use the Barbie logo in artwork critical of Barbie’s unrealistic beauty standards, and the owner of the trademark wouldn’t be able to silence him. However, this is only true as long as there is no risk of confusion between the artist and the trademark owner. In other words, it has to be clear that the Barbie trademark owner has not created or endorsed the artwork. The same artist would open himself up to infringement liability if he used the Barbie trademark again in an unrelated context — say, materials promoting the campaign of a blonde politician. A consumer might be confused by the reference to Barbie and conclude that the Barbie trademark owners were involved in promoting the candidate. As you can see from this excerpt, as long as there would be no confusion that your work was created or endorsed by the company in question, there shouldn’t be an issue with any kind of violation. As a result, Louis Vuitton apologised and allowed Paul to use their pattern within his work. In 2015, artist Richard Prince also came under fire. This time not from a company – but from individuals who felt he had used their work without permission. Prince’s work featured large versions of Instagram posts he came across on his feed. This walked a fine line, with many divided on whether Prince had over-stepped the mark. The courts eventually ruled in favour of the artist, raising the question of ‘is everything in the public domain fair game’?

For many artists, appropriation is extremely important to their work. In Prince’s case he was almost testing the idea of ‘fair use’ and seeing how far he could take the idea. Appropriation allows artists to make a statement. Imagine trying to convey the message of capitalism without mentioning large corporations or politics without mentioning politicians? It gives their work a sense of place and meaning. Using recognisable imagery and logos helps the viewer relate to the piece, whilst strengthening the point being made. Here at CreativeFolk, we love seeing the clever use of logos and familiar icons in art, and the legality of ‘fair use’ is incredibly important to allow talented artists, like the ones mentioned, the freedom to express their opinions without legal consequences. If you’d like to read more about appropriation, the legal aspects and the artists listed above, here’s some links that might interest you: https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/30/8691257/richard-prince-instagram-photos-copyright-law-fair-use http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/1661/appropriation-in-contemporary-art https://medium.com/@cyberlawclinic/the-cyberlaw-guide-to-protest-art-trademark-91f673079d82 https://civic.mit.edu/2010/01/13/never-mind-the-bollocks-shepard-faireys-fight-for-appropriation-fair-use-and-free-culture/

Fancy reading more?

About CreativeFolk

Our goal is to bring the most exciting, original art directly to you, without all the pompous nonsense that seems to surround the art world. We simply want to showcase, for you, what we believe is stunning art from very talented artists at a fair price.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Wonderful original art & prints you may like...

‘Daz’ – Fine Art Male Portrait Giclee Print

‘Redacted’ – Political Art Giclee Signed Print

‘The Three Wishes’ – Abstract Fine Art Giclee Print

‘Propaganda’ – Open Edition Signed Giclee Prints

‘Tribe’ – Original Modern Fine Art Collage

‘The Light’ – Original Abstract Signed Painting

‘Fluffy Samurai’ – Illustrated Fine Art Giclee Print

‘Bunzilla’ – Fine Art Illustration Giclee Print

‘Fragile, This Way Up’ – Figurative Statement Art Print

‘Boba Fett’ – Original Art Signed Canvas

Why buy from us, original exclusive art.

Browse and discover some fantastic pieces of artwork.

Multiple Sizes

Easy to understand sizing to suit every wall space.

Every piece comes with a certificate of authenticity.

Free UK Delivery

Carefully packed and delivered to you.

Subscribe and be first to find out about new artwork

Recieve notifications about new and exciting pieces of artwork. We will also let you know when we release new blog articles and competitions.

Privacy Overview

What size you'd like .

What size would you prefer?*

Is Art Appropriation unethical and illegal? Provide references/ bibliography?  

Insight from top 4 papers, source papers (4).

Related Questions

Criticism of cultural appropriation gained popularity due to the increasing recognition of the need to address issues of insensitivity and disrespect towards different cultures in various contexts, such as fashion and globalized circuits of production . Scholars have highlighted the importance of understanding appropriation as a means of emphasizing agency in cultural diffusion processes, where cultural practices are remodeled according to local contexts, challenging the notion of culture as a homogenous entity . Additionally, the concept of appropriation has been utilized as a tool to confront hierarchical divisions of labor and unequal capital distribution within transnational fashion production, advocating for a more ethical approach to labor practices . This critical engagement with appropriation extends to creative practices, where it is seen as a political strategy to challenge dominant discourses on creativity, originality, and ownership, promoting concepts of sharing and collectivity over individual authorship and private ownership.

Unethical consumption refers to the conscious decision of individuals to engage in morally unacceptable behaviors as consumers, deviating from ethical norms and values. This behavior can manifest in various forms, such as unethical customer behavior targeting employees and other customers , consumers from emerging economies indulging in unethical acts due to poor institutional trust and materialistic values , and the segmentation of consumers based on ethical beliefs, highlighting the existence of unethical consumer segments . Ethical consumption, on the other hand, involves making purchasing decisions based on values and ethical considerations rather than solely on financial factors, reflecting a conscious effort to support products or companies aligned with one's moral beliefs . Critical marketing scholars have emphasized the need to address systemic issues in market structures that influence consumer decision-making, shifting the focus from individual ethical consumers to the broader market morality .

Unethical labor practices persist in the fashion industry due to various interconnected factors. The pressure on models to conform to unrealistic body standards leads to eating disorders. Consumers often distance themselves from worker welfare concerns, accepting exploitation as part of fast fashion's supply chain. The complexity of ethical fashion information overwhelms consumers, causing feelings of shame and guilt, hindering ethical consumption. Traditional definitions of ethical fashion overlook crucial actors and their influences, neglecting a comprehensive understanding of the issue. Additionally, the spread of homework as a form of precarious labor, often among the most exploited workers, highlights the lack of regulation and protection within supply chains. These factors collectively contribute to the perpetuation of unethical labor practices in the fashion industry.

Different jurisdictions approach the issue of appropriation in art under copyright law differently. The US legal framework, exemplified by the Cariou v. Prince case, shows how changes in legal frameworks and litigation risks impact market value and commercial trade in the figurative arts, particularly in the Appropriation Art movement . In the EU, countries rely on specific copyright exceptions for regulating Text and Data Mining (TDM), which contrasts with the more permissive approaches like fair use in the US and broad exemptions in Japan . Additionally, the concept of authorship in art is explored through appropriation art, which challenges the notion that authorship is outdated, emphasizing artists' responsibility for their objectives and products . These diverse approaches reflect the complex interplay between artistic expression, copyright law, and the interpretation of aesthetic judgments in different legal systems.

Unethical usage of one's work refers to activities that violate ethical principles and guidelines in the workplace. It includes behaviors such as hacking, software piracy, phishing, spoofing, and non-work-related computing (cyberloafing) . These behaviors pose a significant security concern for individuals, organizations, and society, as they threaten the security of information systems . Unethical usage of one's work also encompasses surfing the internet for personal reasons while on the clock, which is viewed as stealing time and money from an employer . Additionally, unethical usage can manifest in the form of misconduct in electronic communications, such as e-mail, which can lead to misunderstanding, information overload, privacy infringement, and misuse of shared computing resources . Overall, unethical usage of one's work involves actions that breach professional conduct guidelines, disregard ethical principles, and undermine the trust and integrity of the workplace .

Trending Questions

The implications of organizational politics on team collaboration and communication are multifaceted. Research indicates that power dynamics within teams, particularly in hierarchical structures, can significantly influence interprofessional communication and collaboration. For instance, in multidisciplinary teams (MDTs), the prevailing hierarchy often limits the influence of certain members, which can hinder effective communication and care coordination . Conversely, fostering communication openness, especially in diverse teams, enhances collaboration and team performance, as members are more likely to share information when they feel empowered . Moreover, the ability to navigate organizational politics is crucial for leaders implementing change, as they must possess political skills to mediate competing interests and foster collaboration among stakeholders . The interplay between communication openness and team cohesion further underscores the importance of a supportive environment, where enhanced communication can lead to better outcomes, such as improved infection reporting in healthcare settings . Thus, addressing organizational politics is essential for optimizing team dynamics and communication.

The EU Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) addresses privacy concerns related to generative AI, particularly in the context of Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT. The Act adopts a risk-based approach, aiming to ensure that AI systems deployed within the EU market are safe and uphold fundamental rights, including privacy protections. The complexities and emergent autonomy of generative AI models pose significant challenges for legal compliance and predictability, which the AI Act seeks to mitigate by identifying potential gaps in existing legislation. The proposed framework emphasizes the need for robust regulatory measures to safeguard against privacy attacks, ensuring that generative AI technologies align with the EU's evolving digital landscape and legal standards. As the final text of the AI Act is still under negotiation, its effectiveness in addressing these privacy issues remains to be fully evaluated.

Nursing students can develop essential decision-making skills through board games by enhancing their clinical reasoning, negotiation abilities, and medication knowledge. Research indicates that gamification in nursing education fosters an environment for practicing clinical reasoning and decision-making in a safe setting, leading to improved vigilance and creative thinking among students . Additionally, serious games focused on negotiation skills help students adopt effective negotiation styles, such as integrating and compromising, which are crucial for patient interactions and collaborative decision-making . Furthermore, educational board games have been shown to assist in acquiring medication knowledge, which is vital for reducing medication errors and ensuring patient safety . Overall, these gaming interventions not only engage students but also provide practical experiences that enhance their decision-making capabilities in real-world nursing scenarios, preparing them for the complexities of patient care .

Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) into existing organizational infrastructure presents several significant challenges. One primary issue is the misalignment between AI technologies and current organizational dynamics, clinical processes, and administrative structures, which can hinder effective implementation . Additionally, there are concerns regarding the quality of data and the need for domain expertise, which are critical for successful AI adoption in knowledge management processes . Legal implications also pose challenges, particularly around privacy, liability, and the need for new regulations to protect workers amid potential job displacement . Furthermore, organizations face resource constraints and the need for ongoing evaluation of AI systems to ensure they meet performance standards, which can be resource-intensive and complex . Collectively, these factors underscore the multifaceted nature of AI integration, necessitating a comprehensive approach that addresses both technical and socio-legal dimensions .

Protecting traditional knowledge (TK) and traditional cultural expressions (TCEs) in the digital age presents several key challenges. One significant issue is the inadequacy of existing intellectual property rights (IPR) frameworks, which are often ill-suited for collectively-held TK, leading to difficulties in ensuring equitable benefit sharing and legal protection for indigenous communities . Additionally, the rapid evolution of technology and cultural values has shifted younger generations' interests away from traditional arts, making it harder to engage them in preservation efforts . The rise of generative AI also complicates matters, as it can both enhance the dissemination of traditional culture and raise ethical concerns regarding authenticity and appropriation . Furthermore, the lack of adequate training in Library and Information Science programs regarding TCEs leaves future professionals unprepared to address these challenges effectively . Collectively, these factors underscore the need for a multifaceted approach to safeguard TK and TCEs in a rapidly changing digital landscape.