More (yes, more) on the Fairey poster incident

[kenw]

http://blogs.chron.com/peep/2009/10/...dmits_lie.html

and

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09291/1006530-84.stm


dig and hole big enough and you'll eventually fall into it....

[PhotoPunk]

I hope he gets buried.

[Jeff Lane]

According to the story, his lawyers are quitting him. (Another source says it's not because he lied to them, but for "other reasons.")

I hate it when my clients lie to me (and they sometimes do). The fact is that Mr. Fairey had a pretty decent argument under "fair use" law. (I know that will be an unpopular opinion on this board, but it is what it is.) Neither side had a slam-dunk on that issue, and given that state of facts and law, I would have thought some kind of settlement could be reached. Once you're caught in a lie during "discovery" (legalese for all that mountain of paperwork you have to produce and questions you have to answer in the years before trial, so that lawyers can rake in all those outrageous fees), however, courts tend to get torqued off and make things really unpleasant. And the other side will smell blood, and refuse any settlement that benefits you at all.

I'd have fired the jerk, too.

[mmuhlenkamp]

Fairey is an ass. He "borrows" work and then gets pissed off and sues others that have "borrowed" work from him. If his attitude were different he wouldn't be in quite as big of a hole, why say he didn't use that image? If he truly believed it fell under "fair use" why did he lie?

Idiot.