Arguments Against Appropriation Art

Appropriation art is the art of taking other images and works, and creating something new. These artists take work from other artists, and modify them enough to create a new meaning. Either they are doing this, or they are forming a parody off of the original image. No matter what an appropriation artist is doing, they are still taking bits and pieces from other artists’ work. Doing this can create legal issues with copyright infringement, and bends the rules on what is fair use and what is not. Since appropriation art is a new and modern art form, the laws regarding copyright do not fully protect what can and cannot be used. Numerous artists have been put on trial for their use of other artists work, and the outcomes are inconsistent. The copyright laws created for art in general cannot be subject to every single form of art. Every form of art is different and cannot be treated the same, especially for appropriation art. The laws already in place are not only impacting general artists, but the artists of

Currently, the legal way to deal with copyright infringement in this art does not work as it does with any other form of art. Being that artists are using other artist’s work to create something new, it is difficult to determine whether or not it is of fair use. The factors in which the court configures the fair use of an image work slightly, although they do need refined. Various court cases have been made on copyright infringement and inconsistencies are found within them. Every case can be different, but the patterns found in them are similar. When one artist’s piece gets declared in terms of fair use, and another artist’s work of the same confinement gets declared not fair of use and is found as copyright infringement, there is no balance. The court cases should be consistent, and better laws created around this would help