The readings have kind of reinforced the importance of copyright and ethics and expanded the knowledge I had when first starting this lesson. What stood out most importantly to me was the Falling Man image and Ram commercial. The readings that came up towards that disturbing image showed many ethical concerns towards the NY Times. One author stated that he was one of many readers of the times that had called with a complaint towards the use of that visual. A common statement throughout the readings was, how would this man’s family feel about this image being shared amongst the public descriptions of it being called inappropriate and calloused were only a few terms of many.

The Ram commercial was also a disappointing form of advertising that should have been executed better, especially with different audio. I’m surprised they even had gotten permission for the audio and didn’t give specifics on what it would be used for. The commercial has nothing to do with civil rights despite using the speech of a civil rights leader. I see that as unethical of the company and it honestly appears as a red flag for a company to not go into specifics about what a licensed piece would be used for.

I haven’t used licensed work from another creative for any of my work but images such as Istock photos I’ve credited. In terms of the Fairey Copyright Hope Poster case, I felt that the outcome was fair despite that Fairey tampered with evidence at one point. I understand there were quite a few adjustments to make his work appear different from the visual that he used but the fact that the visual was still used trumps that, meaning that Fairey should have gotten permission to use that photograph. I understand AP’s actions especially if they lost compensation because of the work and therefore I am glad that there was a settlement where Fairey paid an undisclosed amount and both parties obtained rights to sell the work.