As a photographer and a die hard liberal, I find nothing offensive with the picture. Political art is both beautiful and uncomfortable. It both satisfies viewer's interests and generates discussion. Obviously this piece has generated a lot of discussion, and his piece is clearly a parody of the Time's cover. However, I DO take issue with SOMEONE ELSE taking the image off Flickr WITHOUT the artist's permission, editing it and posting it throughout the city. That was a clear violation of the artist's copyright. Flickr was completely within their rights to remove the image. In fact, part of their Terms of Service allows them to remove anything they deem offensive. That is why I refuse to post images there. I hope the artist continues his work and they catch the person who stole his piece off Flickr. Afterall, he is the people who clearly broke the law.
Slashdot Mirror
As a photographer and a die hard liberal, I find nothing offensive with the picture. Political art is both beautiful and uncomfortable. It both satisfies viewer's interests and generates discussion. Obviously this piece has generated a lot of discussion, and his piece is clearly a parody of the Time's cover. However, I DO take issue with SOMEONE ELSE taking the image off Flickr WITHOUT the artist's permission, editing it and posting it throughout the city. That was a clear violation of the artist's copyright. Flickr was completely within their rights to remove the image. In fact, part of their Terms of Service allows them to remove anything they deem offensive. That is why I refuse to post images there. I hope the artist continues his work and they catch the person who stole his piece off Flickr. Afterall, he is the people who clearly broke the law.