In the past, I have created videos that used music from other people that were copyrighted. In order to make sure I wasn’t given a copyright strike, my way of crediting the artist was to add their information in the biography of the video, as well as any links that could be provided to their works. That was the best means of me using the audio without being forced to change it or be given a strike for using it.
The arguments and outcome of the Fairey Copyright case is messy in retrospect. I believe that it was right of him to take time for not saving the evidence he had and tampering with the evidence, because if he had kept those documents, he might have had a better chance of keeping his case from having to plead guilty. The use of copyright is to make sure that the original artist is credited. If he had at least kept the documents and made sure to reach out to the photographer who he used the image from, then things would have gone a lot smoother. The argument of him suing those who tried to use his work for other means is reasonable, because he used something to create another new prospect. This method of art requires complete transparency and as long as it’s used in a good light and given credit to those who originally inspired the work, then there won’t be as much heavy backlash as there was. Because of the fear he had, Fairey erased all of the research and work he did behind his work when he should have kept it all and gave his reasoning. Those documents he got rid of could have been used to give credit and offer him a means of not having to serve time for ‘stealing’ work.