Landes, William M. "Copyright Protection and Appropriation Art." The Arts and Humanities in Public Life. Http://culturalpolicy.uchicago.edu/conf1999/landes.html.
The author begins by bringing up many issues that surround appropriation art. These problems include when art is based on renowned copyrights images, when images are borrowed without appropriate art intent, and when images are used for educational purposes. Instead of lamenting that the grey area of copyright can never be solved, this author takes a different approach. Landes proposes a solution to all these problems. Not necessarily a solution, but a belief that current copyright law can decide these matters.
The article delves into the economics of copyright. Landes discusses how without copyright protection artists would never be able to recoup losses to create art and therefore would be working without incentive. This would lead to a culture devoid of meaningful expression. He argues that there needs to be an appropriate balance between too little and too much protection. This balance would ensure that efficiency and creativity are promoted.
This piece brings up many questions about how appropriation art exists among law, society, and culture. It makes us question the benefits and downfalls of copyright protection. Like many copyright articles, it discusses the Koons v Rogers case. From its analysis, we gather that not all appropriation art should be protected under fair use. Additionally, we see that if it was, courts would be put in the unsuitable position of judging what art is and what is not.
Here, Chicago Law School lays out the problems and relationship between "copyright law, borrowed images, and appropriation art". Appropriation art borrows images from the mass media and elsewhere and incorporates them in new ways into art. The motive is to change the way we look at that object. There are various problems to the theory including: "A constructs several identical sculptural works based on B's copyrighted photograph or comic book character." which applies directly to Koons, and his work, String of Puppies. Apart from not being that transformed from the original, Koons' version of the photograph most likely did not take away from the financial market of the original, as the intent of this artistic work is entirely different - it is intended for display in a gallery, or in someone's home. However, Koons argued that it was fair use on the grounds that he was making satirical comment on mass culture in society. The court did not buy this defense, as his work did not apply to directly to the appropriated work. This tag is useful in making us question what exactly constitutes appropriation art, and the relationships between the borrowed images and how they are used. The fact that appropriation art is part of the history of art acknowledges it as a valid genre or term. However, Koons it testing those boundaries to the point that he is criticized that he is making a mockery of art. Appropriation art has other drawbacks in that it goes both ways in promoting new art but at the same time limiting it. Artists are less likely to come up with their own original images. The article also underlines that we cannot merely label something as 'art' and therefore expect it to be exempt from copyright. This would leave judges in a extremely subjective and difficult position of deciding what is art.