Copyright “Kruger” Violation

The lawsuit in this case is most definitely complicated. Kruger did use a photograph from public domain that was created by someone else and made a profit from it. Kruger also claimed the work by signing it and gave no reference to the original creator. Despite the technicality of time lapse in copyright laws, this still feels like Kruger stole the work and committed copyright infringement.

When art is submitted to the public domain it still has a creator who should always be given credit for the work. Many artists submit their work into a public domain with a copyright clause that states weather or not their work can be used with or without reference to them and weather or not the art can be altered in any way. While it may be possible to use other people’s work for profit, I do not feel it should ever be done without express permission from the artist. The line for me is drawn when the owner of the art is excluded from recognition and profit.

Parallels to this case can be seen in AI created work when AI uses images without permission. These images are then spread across the internet via social media and claimed as original work without any credit to the original owners or even to the AI that modified the work. When it comes to social media and AI copyright infringement is truly out of control.