by Mike Masnick
Thu, Aug 20th 2009 8:58am
A bunch of folks have been sending in this story about Flickr supposedly taking down the "Obama Joker" Time Magazine cover that's been in the news lately, but I have to admit that I'm confused about the reasoning behind the takedown. There are questions of whether it's just "censorship," but I'm trying to figure out what's the actual copyright claim. The suggestion is that the concern is from Time Magazine, which doesn't like its brand associated with the falsified cover -- but wouldn't that be a trademark issue, rather than a copyright one? If there's any copyright issue at all, it would potentially (and then, weakly) be from whoever owns the rights to the original photo that was changed. But seeing as there's still an ongoing battle in the Shepard Fairey case to determine if that sort of thing is fair use and I haven't seen anyone identify the original Obama photo that was used here, it's not even clear who would be crying copyright infringement. So... where exactly is the copyright infringement here?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- The Rise Of ContentID Trolls: Dan Bull Has Someone Claim His Music, Take His Money, Issue Takedowns
- Latest TVEyes Ruling A Mixed Bag: Archiving & Sharing Privately Is Fair Use; Downloading & Sharing Publicly Is Not
- Appeals Court: No, You Can't Copyright A Chicken Sandwich
- Court Says Search Engines Not Making Things Disappear The Moment They're Deleted From Third-Party Sites Not 'Defamation'
- Tumblr Complies With DMCA Takedown Requests From A Self-Proclaimed Future-Alien From Another Planet