See, I agree with the general idea than an artist would be able to control the distribution of his art. But I think it is absurd someone can claim there is a copyright issue if I upload a picture of myself (taken by someone else) to the internet.
I reject the notion that someone can "own" my image. If it's a painted picture, sure, I can see that being more legitimate. It's something the artist actually created. The artist here did not create Trump's image, he simply took a picture.
Regardless of the medium, a system with a reasonable copyright law should apply Fair Use here. It cannot be reasonably argued that the photographer/artist is being negatively affected by a post like this at all. Why should it be the artist's business if his person is not being misrepresented and his profits are not being affected? Art MUST be shared to facilitate the evolution of culture, and strict copyright law like this effectively censors society.
I don't disagree with anything you said but the law as it stands today favors the copyright holder and whether we agree or like it or not in this case (It goes both ways too) Twitter's policy of removing first and having the ability for someone to contest a claim after the fact is their best option of staying in the clear.
I don't side with Twitter on much, if anything but I can't fault them for removing that image on liability grounds even if he is president and its fair use etc. Perhaps his team is contesting it and they'll be forced to restore it, in this case it is possible it is not political.
See, I agree with the general idea than an artist would be able to control the distribution of his art. But I think it is absurd someone can claim there is a copyright issue if I upload a picture of myself (taken by someone else) to the internet.
I reject the notion that someone can "own" my image. If it's a painted picture, sure, I can see that being more legitimate. It's something the artist actually created. The artist here did not create Trump's image, he simply took a picture.
Regardless of the medium, a system with a reasonable copyright law should apply Fair Use here. It cannot be reasonably argued that the photographer/artist is being negatively affected by a post like this at all. Why should it be the artist's business if his person is not being misrepresented and his profits are not being affected? Art MUST be shared to facilitate the evolution of culture, and strict copyright law like this effectively censors society.
I don't disagree with anything you said but the law as it stands today favors the copyright holder and whether we agree or like it or not in this case (It goes both ways too) Twitter's policy of removing first and having the ability for someone to contest a claim after the fact is their best option of staying in the clear.
I don't side with Twitter on much, if anything but I can't fault them for removing that image on liability grounds even if he is president and its fair use etc. Perhaps his team is contesting it and they'll be forced to restore it, in this case it is possible it is not political.