Shepard Fairey Quotes

I wasn't political enough to write articles about myself or go to cocktail parties, meaning that not only has my art been pirated and my intellectual property rights stolen, but my work has been misrepresented.

A brainy person does not abuse copyright; instead they respect it and uphold it.

An intellectual property worker will take copyright protection on everything he can get.

The first-sale doctrine reflects basic common sense - and follows from the logic of treating copyrights and other 'intellectual property' with no more protection than regular property.

When I created the email in the U.S., my mentor could have easily copyrighted it and taken credit for it.

I do think that copyrights and intellectual property are important - it's important to be able to keep people from making verbatim copies of a particular creation that could somehow hurt the creator. If I spend time conceiving and making a piece of art and somebody else sees that it has market value and replicates it in order to steal part of my market, then that's not cool.

If you create something, you don't want someone else to go and profit from it; you have your right to make a living and everything. So I respect copyright. What I don't respect is copyright extremism. And I what I don't respect is a business model that encourages piracy.

I think copyright is moral, proper. I think a creator has the right to control the disposition of his or her works - I actually believe that the financial issue is less important than the integrity of the work, the attribution, that kind of stuff.

The copyright bargain: a balance between protection for the artist and rights for the consumer.

Traditional copyright has been that you can't make a full copy of somebody's work without their permission.

Copyright is too valuable to be wholly renounced.

What we are fighting for is the intent of copyright as it is described in the US constitution: the promotion of culture.

Creativity in copyright law only means that you didn’t copy it from someone else …. Most works that are protected under copyright are not creative in the colloquial sense of the word.

If the contest for an international copyright is to be managed like the annual pig-iron conflict, or the wool fight, ending in a compromise by which every interest gets a certain amount of protection at the expense of the public, it will certainly be of little service either to England, America, or humanity at large. What is needed is a legal protection for property in ideas; in other words, an authors' copyright.

… the pursuit of civil rights by copyright.

There are people out there who don't see value in intellectual property, and so they're always going to have a problem if there are lawsuits involving intellectual property.

I firmly believe in copyrights and am put off by plagiarism.

We need to create technologies - and a culture of respect, and an updated legal doctrine, too - that allow creative folks to make money from their own efforts.

Fair use is always going to be a gray area, and it should be. We need to allow for things we can't see yet.

Only one thing is impossible for God: To find any sense in any copyright law on the planet.

You cannot steal somebody's intellectual property. Law and justice protect.

Intellectual property has the shelf life of a banana.

A free culture is not a culture without property; it is not a culture in which artists don't get paid.

I have always found it interesting... that there are people who regard copyright infringement as a form of flattery.

Big Tech's nonchalance about copyright violation tramples over people like my wife and me, who strive to make a living in the great tradition of the creative realm.