Reading, Using and Reporting on Political Art: Method, Copyright and Archives

The first nine lessons told what political art did. This one is a toolkit for what you do with it: how to read a work carefully, when you may copy it, where to find it and how to describe it. The lessons on photography and on music before 1970 and after supplied examples. Nothing here is advice about a particular dispute. It describes the rules and the cases so that a reporter or an advocate can see how the courts have reasoned and where the archives set their terms.

A method for reading a political work

The Library of Congress teaching page offers a free primary source analysis tool for students, a fillable form with three steps shown as observe, question and reflect, and a set of teacher's guides, among them one titled "Analyzing Political Cartoons."⁶ The teacher's text describes the process as observing, reflecting, questioning and investigating further. That sequence is the right backbone for any work, from a 1908 cartoon to a 2026 meme, because it puts the cheapest step first. You can observe a drawing without knowing anything about it. You cannot honestly say what it means until you have looked.

Worked example: a public domain cartoon

The Center for Legislative Archives holds approximately 2,400 original pen and ink drawings by Clifford K. Berryman in the U.S. Senate Collection.⁷ The National Archives' own page says he drew for the Washington Post from 1890 until 1907 and then for the Washington Evening Star until his death in 1949.⁸ One cartoon from the collection, The House is in Session (According to the Minority View), ran in the Evening Star on April 16, 1908 and is cataloged at the National Archives as identifier 306107.⁹ The archives describe it as showing the House as a place where the majority, drawn as clones of Speaker Joseph Cannon, rules the floor with no room for minority voices.¹⁰

Run the six steps. Observe: a chamber full of figures with the same face. Maker and publisher: Berryman, a staff artist at a Washington evening paper read by the people who sat in the chamber he drew. Time: April 1908. The page does not say which events prompted the cartoon, and a reader has to find them in the paper's reporting from the days before. Devices: caricature and exaggeration (the repeated face), analogy (a body of men likened to copies of one man), irony (the title promises the minority's point of view and shows its absence). Question: is it true that the majority gave the minority no room? A reporter would check roll calls and rules, and would note that a cartoon argues, it does not prove. Use: the cartoon was first published in 1908, which is before 1931, so it is in the public domain by expiration, and the archives hold the original drawing in a federal collection. It is safe to embed with a credit to the National Archives.

A second Berryman drawing is in the National Archives' free teaching set America and the World: Foreign Affairs in Political Cartoons, 1898 to 1940, which is a good place to practice the method on a work whose caption and context you have to find yourself. DocsTeach lists it as The Winner, July 16, 1912, National Archives Identifier 6010956.¹¹ It is also the cover image of that book, which credits it to the Washington Evening Star of July 16, 1912. It shows¹² a figure in a stars-and-stripes running costume, holding a star-spangled top hat, sprinting on a track ahead of a tearful runner with a globe for a head, with a small teddy bear running behind and a crowded stadium in the background. The archive pages checked do not say what event prompted it, so the context is for the reader to find.

Copyright and fair use for journalists and advocates

The statute is 17 U.S.C. 107. It says that the fair use of a copyrighted work, "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright."¹³ It then names four factors: the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the work as a whole, and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the work. It adds that the fact a work is unpublished does not itself bar a finding of fair use.¹⁴ The Copyright Office's own fair use page is the next stop, and this lesson did not get a copy of it, so read it directly.

Four cases shape how those factors work for political art.

Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (decided February 24, 1988).¹⁵ Hustler ran a parody in its November 1983 issue of a liquor company's celebrity "first time" advertisements, with a fabricated interview with the minister Jerry Falwell and a small print disclaimer calling it an ad parody not to be taken seriously. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote for the Court, joined by six justices, with Justice White concurring in the judgment and Justice Kennedy not participating.¹⁶ The Court held that public figures and public officials cannot recover damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress from a publication like this unless they also show a false statement of fact made with actual malice.¹⁷ The case protects caricature of public figures that no reasonable reader takes as fact, which is the legal foundation for editorial cartooning. It is a First Amendment case, and it does not reach copyright.

Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music (March 7, 1994, unanimous, Justice Souter).¹⁸ The Court held a commercial parody can be fair use, rejected a presumption that commercial use is unfair, and said parody "needs to mimic an original to make its point." Parody gets no presumption of fairness either, and the Court sent the case back because neither side had offered evidence on the market for rap versions. Lesson 09 covers the facts.

Fairey and the Associated Press. The Hope poster of 2008 was based on an AP photograph taken by Mannie Garcia.¹⁹ Accounts differ on his status: the Wikipedia article cites his own site for freelancer, and NPR's January 2011 report says an update established that he was an AP staffer.²⁰ The AP said in February 2009 that the use needed permission.²¹ Fairey sued for a declaration of fair use. In October 2009 he admitted he had based the poster on the AP photograph and had fabricated and destroyed evidence to hide it, as the New York Times reported and the Wikipedia article cites.²² The U.S. Attorney's press release of February 24, 2012 says his 2009 complaint named a photograph of Obama with George Clooney at an April 2006 National Press Club event, when he had actually used a tightly cropped AP image from the same event.²³ The parties settled in January 2011, according to an AP release, agreeing to share rights to make posters and merchandise bearing the Hope image and to work together on future images.²⁴ Fairey pleaded guilty on February 24, 2012 to one count of criminal contempt tied to the AP litigation, admitting he destroyed documents and fabricated evidence, according to the U.S. Attorney's press release.²⁵ In September 2012 he was sentenced to two years of probation, 300 hours of community service and a $25,000 fine, as reported by the Los Angeles Times and cited in the Wikipedia article.²⁶ Talking Points Memo's report of September 7, 2012 confirms the probation and the fine but does not mention the community service.²⁷ No court ruled on fair use. A judge urged settlement and said the AP would win (a New York Times report of May 29, 2010, cited in the Wikipedia article and not checked directly),²⁸ which is a remark and not a holding. Anyone who cites the case for a fair use rule is citing something it did not decide.

Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (May 18, 2023). Justice Sotomayor wrote for a seven to two Court that the first fair use factor favored Goldsmith for the Foundation's 2016 licensing of the Orange Prince image to Condé Nast.²⁹ The photograph and the Warhol portrait served substantially the same purpose, since both were portraits of Prince used in magazines to illustrate stories about him, and the licensing was commercial. A new aesthetic or perceived meaning did not change the result. The Court limited its holding to that licensing. Justice Kagan dissented, joined by Chief Justice Roberts.³⁰ A line from the opinion, "fair use is an objective inquiry into what a user does,"³¹ is the practical rule: ask what the new use is for.

Case	Date and court	Question	Holding in brief
Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46	February 24, 1988; U.S. Supreme Court	Can a public figure recover emotional distress damages for an outrageous parody?	Not without a false statement of fact made with actual malice
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, 510 U.S. 569	March 7, 1994; U.S. Supreme Court, unanimous	Is a commercial parody fair use?	It can be; no presumption either way; remanded on market harm
Fairey and the AP (Hope poster)	Settled January 2011; Fairey plea February 2012	Was the poster fair use of Garcia's photograph?	No ruling; settlement shared rights in the image
Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith, 598 U.S. 508	May 18, 2023; U.S. Supreme Court, seven to two	Does Warhol's Orange Prince image license to a magazine count as fair use?	First factor favors Goldsmith for the 2016 licensing; same purpose, commercial use

The public domain cutoff and government works

Peter Hirtle's chart, published by Cornell, says works first published in the United States before 1931 are in the public domain as of 2026 due to copyright expiration.³² For works published from 1931 through 1963 with notice and renewed, the term is 95 years after publication, and the same 95 years applies to works from 1964 through 1977 published with notice. For works from 1978 forward, the term is the author's life plus 70 years, or the shorter of 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation for corporate works.³³ Unpublished works get life plus 70, or 120 years from creation for anonymous or corporate works. Section 305 says terms run to the end of the calendar year in which they would otherwise expire, so a work published in 1931 enters the public domain on January 1, 2027, and each January 1 after that adds the next publication year.³⁴

Government works are a different category. Section 105(a) says that copyright protection is not available for any work of the United States Government, although the government may hold copyrights transferred to it.³⁵ In practice that covers the photographs and posters made by federal employees in the Farm Security Administration, the Office of War Information and the Works Progress Administration. It does not automatically cover a work a contractor made or one the government merely acquired, so look at the catalog entry. Works of state and local governments follow their own rules.

Licensing a cartoon, photograph or song for use

Syndicates license cartoons from cartoonists, and agencies such as the Associated Press and Getty Images license photographs. Their terms differ by use, size, audience and duration, and the sources checked for this lesson did not give verifiable benchmark prices, so none is given. For music, ASCAP's campaign guidance sets the structure: a performance license covers the performance, a synchronization license covers putting a song in a video and needs the publisher's permission, and a master recording needs the label's. Video posted online needs those licenses too, according to the same guidance.⁴⁰ A platform's automatic detection system is a separate matter from the law, and the sources checked do not document how any platform's system works, so the lesson says only that you should expect it and read the platform's own rules.

Archives and how to search them

Archive	What it holds	Access terms stated on its page
Library of Congress Prints and Photographs, Cabinet of American Illustration	About 4,000 original drawings, primarily 1880 to 1910, by American book, magazine and newspaper illustrators	Metadata lists "unrestricted online access"; a separate rights page exists
National Archives, Center for Legislative Archives	Approximately 2,400 Berryman pen and ink drawings in the U.S. Senate Collection	Viewable in the National Archives Catalog with the credit line "From the United States Senate Collection, Center for Legislative Archives"; check each entry for reuse terms
Billy Ireland Cartoon Library and Museum	Describes itself as the world's largest collection of materials related to cartoons and comics41	Searchable collections online; a Reading Room and a research and reproduction page
Herb Block Foundation	Publishes its 2011 Report on Editorial Cartooning	Report is open to read on the foundation's site
Smithsonian Open Access	More than 5.2 million 2D and 3D digital items	Filter for CC0 items; the page says images can be downloaded and reused without asking
The Metropolitan Museum of Art	Over 492,000 images of public domain artworks42	CC0; look for the OA icon; introduced February 2017
Woody Guthrie Center archives, Tulsa	Largest collection of Dylan and Guthrie primary materials in the world, by its account, plus the papers of Phil Ochs and Tom Paxton	Reading room by appointment year round; finding aids online
The Pulitzer Prizes	Winners and finalists by year, including Editorial Cartooning and, by 2022, Illustrated Reporting and Commentary	Free to read; the page does not say when the category was renamed

Two practical notes. First, read the finding aid before requesting anything. It tells you how the collection is arranged and what is restricted. Second, some archives block automated downloading, so use the item page's own download link. The National Archives Catalog blocks automated downloading, which is why this lesson takes descriptions from DocsTeach and the Center for Legislative Archives page and uses the catalog page for the identifier.

AI generated political images

The law specific to this lesson is Idaho's. Idaho Code 67-6628A, added in 2024 (session law chapter 172), is titled electioneering communications, use of synthetic media, and may be cited as the Freedom From AI-Rigged (FAIR) Elections Act.⁴³ It defines synthetic media as an audio or video recording of an individual's speech or conduct, created with generative adversarial network techniques or other digital technology, that is realistic but false: to a reasonable individual it depicts a real event, action or speech that did not occur in reality, and it provides a fundamentally different understanding or impression than the unaltered original would. A candidate whose action or speech is deceptively represented may seek an injunction prohibiting publication, and may seek general damages, special damages or both from the information content provider. The court may award fees and costs to the prevailing party. The plaintiff must establish the use of synthetic media by clear and convincing evidence. The defense is a disclosure that reads "This (video/audio) has been manipulated." For video the text must be prominently displayed, easily readable by the average viewer and shown for the duration of the video. For audio only, it must be clearly spoken at the beginning and end, and repeated at intervals of no more than two minutes if the audio runs longer than two minutes.⁴⁴ The section's history line shows it was added in 2024 and lists no 2025 or 2026 amendments.⁴⁵ The statute's definition covers audio and video only, and the text does not mention still images. The course on advocacy and social media, lesson 09 of course 70, covers the electioneering communication windows and the platform rules in detail.

The Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity, which describes itself as a project of the Joint Development Foundation, a Washington based nonprofit,⁴⁶ develops the technical standard behind Content Credentials. The sources checked for this lesson do not describe how a manifest works or give a founding year, so this lesson makes no claim about either beyond the name and the coalition's own description of itself.

An Idaho angle

A search of the Idaho State Archives catalog turns up a single cartoon item, a 1964 "Henry" cartoon credited to Carl Anderson for the one hundredth anniversary of the Idaho Statesman (MS 2/1016).⁴⁷ That is a comic strip artist's anniversary drawing, not a record of an editorial cartoonist on the paper's staff, and the sources checked for this lesson do not document any Idaho staff cartoonist, so no name is offered. A reporter looking for Idaho editorial cartoons should start with the Idaho State Archives' manuscript collections and should check each cartoon's date against the 1931 cutoff before reproducing it.

Questions and answers

Do I need permission to quote a few words of a song in an article?

Short quotation for news reporting and criticism is the kind of use 17 U.S.C. 107 names, and the four factors decide whether a particular quotation is fair. There is no safe word count. The course rule is to quote a title and a few words and describe the rest. See the statute.

Is a cartoon from 1925 in the public domain?

If it was first published in the United States in 1925, yes. Works first published before 1931 are in the public domain as of 2026, according to the Cornell chart. The copyright in a particular reproduction, such as a new photograph of the original with its own creative choices, may be a separate question for a museum to answer.

Are photographs by federal agency photographers free to use?

Works of the U.S. Government are not eligible for copyright under section 105(a), and photographs made by federal employees in the course of their jobs fall within that. A contractor's or freelancer's photograph acquired by the government needs separate checking.

Does Hustler v. Falwell protect all parody?

It protects against emotional distress claims by public figures over parody no reasonable reader takes as fact, unless there is a false statement of fact made with actual malice. It is a First Amendment ruling about the speech, and not about copying. The opinion is short and worth reading.

Did Warhol v. Goldsmith overturn Campbell?

No. The Court applied the earlier decision and held that the first factor favored Goldsmith for the 2016 magazine licensing because the two works served substantially the same purpose. Campbell's statement that parody needs to mimic an original to make its point remains. See Warhol.

Does Idaho's law ban AI images of candidates?

No. It covers realistic but false audio and video recordings in electioneering communications and offers a disclosure defense. It does not mention still images. A candidate must prove the use by clear and convincing evidence. The text is at Idaho Code 67-6628A.

What is the quickest way to check an image's rights?

Find the archive's item page and read its rights field. The National Archives, the Library of Congress, the Met and the Smithsonian each state their terms. If you cannot find a statement, treat the image as protected and link to it.

How many staff editorial cartoonists are there?

The Herb Block Foundation's 2011 report estimated approximately 2,000 at the start of the twentieth century and fewer than 40 at the time of the report.⁴⁸ Matt Bors wrote in the Columbia Journalism Review in 2021 that the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists counted 275 staff cartoonists in 1957 and that fewer than thirty were employed full time, a figure he did not attribute.⁴⁹ See the foundation's report.

Hard questions

Isn't "fair use" too vague to rely on? Why not just license everything?

Licensing is the safest path where a rights holder exists and a price is reasonable. Fair use exists because some uses, such as criticism and news reporting about the work itself, could not happen if the target of the criticism held a veto. The Court in Campbell said parody needs to mimic the original to make its point. The cost of that flexibility is uncertainty, which is why this course tells writers to use the smallest piece, and to link when unsure.

Doesn't Warhol v. Goldsmith make political commentary harder?

It narrowed one argument, that a new look alone makes a use transformative. The Court said the first factor looks at the purpose of the use, and it limited its ruling to the commercial licensing of Orange Prince. Commentary that targets the original work is in a different position from a use that serves the same purpose as the original. Justice Kagan's dissent argued the majority gave too little weight to transformation. Both opinions are in the Justia record.

If Fairey admitted fabricating evidence, why include his case at all?

Because it is the best known example of a political image fight, and because it shows how misreported cases become false rules. The plea concerned destroying and fabricating evidence. The copyright question never reached a ruling. The settlement shared rights in the image.

Idaho's statute has no satire exemption. Doesn't that chill political humor?

The statute reaches realistic but false audio and video that to a reasonable person depict an event that did not occur, and it offers a disclosure defense, which a satirist can use. The plaintiff carries a clear and convincing burden. Critics of such laws argue that even a disclosure requirement burdens speech, and supporters argue that deceptive recordings near an election are a distinct harm. No Idaho decision applying the statute was found in the sources checked.

Why trust a cartoon archive's description over my own reading?

You should not trust it over your own observation, and the method says so. The archive's description is a starting point with a named source. Your own step one list is the check on it.

Pictures, Numbers and Infographics

The figures below were checked on the sources named in the table captions and in the sources list. Where a source gives no figure, the table says so and does not estimate.

Editorial cartooning Pulitzer winners by decade

The Pulitzer Prizes' Editorial Cartooning page lists winners through 2020, with 2021 marked no award.⁵⁰ The 2022 to 2025 entries come from the Pulitzer pages for those years, where the category is named Illustrated Reporting and Commentary. The Editorial Cartooning page shows no entry at all for 1923, 1936, 1960, 1965 and 1973 and does not explain the gaps. Counts below are years with a listed winner, with a team counted once.

⁵⁴

Decade	Years with a listed winner	Repeat winners and notes
1920s (from 1922)	7	Rollin Kirby 1922, 1925, 1929; Nelson Harding 1927, 1928
1930s	9	Edmund Duffy 1931, 1934; no entry for 1936
1940s	10	Duffy 1940; Herbert Block 1942; Bill Mauldin 1945; Clifford Berryman 1944
1950s	10	Block 1954; Mauldin 1959; Daniel Fitzpatrick 1955
1960s	8	Paul Conrad 1964; Pat Oliphant 1967; no entries for 1960 and 1965
1970s	9	Conrad 1971; Jeff MacNelly 1972 and 1978; Paul Szep 1974 and 1977; Garry Trudeau 1975; Block 1979; no entry for 1973
1980s	10	Conrad 1984; MacNelly 1985; Jules Feiffer 1986; Berke Breathed 1987
1990s	10	Signe Wilkinson 1992
2000s	10	Ann Telnaes 2001
2010s	10	2018: Jake Halpern and Michael Sloan, New York Times; 2019: Darrin Bell
2020s (to 2025)	5	2020 Barry Blitt; 2021 no award; 2022 Insider team;51 2023 Mona Chalabi;52 2024 Medar de la Cruz;53 2025 Ann Telnaes

Staff cartoonist counts over time

⁵⁶

Date	Count	Source and caution
Start of the 20th century	Approximately 2,000 editorial cartoonists employed by American newspapers55	Herb Block Foundation, Report on Editorial Cartooning (December 2011); an estimate
1957	275 staff cartoonists	Association of American Editorial Cartoonists as reported by Matt Bors, Columbia Journalism Review, Fall 2021
2011	Fewer than 40	Herb Block Foundation 2011 report, "today" as of the report
About 2021	Fewer than 30 full time	Bors, with no attribution for the figure; he notes Signe Wilkinson and Tom Toles retired in 2020 and their jobs were not filled
1980 and 2000	No verified figure found	The sources checked give no count for these years, so none is stated

Public domain entry dates, derived from the Cornell chart and 17 U.S.C. 305

First published in the U.S. in	Status in 2026	Enters the public domain on
1930 or earlier	Public domain by expiration	Already
1931	Protected if published with notice and renewed	January 1, 2027
1932	Protected if published with notice and renewed	January 1, 2028
1945	Protected if published with notice and renewed	January 1, 2041
1963	Protected if published with notice and renewed	January 1, 2059
1964 to 1977	Protected, 95 years from publication if published with notice	January 1 of the year 96 years after publication
1978 and later	Author's life plus 70 years; corporate works the shorter of 95 years from publication or 120 from creation	Depends on the author

The entry dates in the third column are arithmetic from a 95 year term that runs to the end of the calendar year. They are not quoted from the chart, and a work's renewal and notice history can change the answer.

Benchmark licensing prices

No verifiable benchmark prices for licensing a cartoon, a photograph or a song were found in the sources checked for this lesson, so the lesson gives none. Ask the syndicate, agency or publisher for a written quote that states the use, size, audience and term.

Timeline, 1900 to 2026

The timeline places dates from this course that were verified in the sources named in the lessons. Dates above the axis are cultural events and below are legal events.

Learn more

• Library of Congress, primary source analysis tool and teacher's guides: The free method this lesson is built on, with a guide to political cartoons.
• 17 U.S.C. 107, fair use: The statute with the four factors, in the original words.
• 17 U.S.C. 105, government works: The rule behind federal photographs and posters being free to use.
• Cornell, Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States: The chart for checking any work's date.
• Hustler v. Falwell: The opinion that protects parody of public figures.
• Campbell v. Acuff-Rose: The parody and fair use decision.
• Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith: The 2023 opinions on the first fair use factor.
• Idaho Code 67-6628A: The text of the FAIR Elections Act, so you can check each description.
• National Archives, Berryman cartoons: The collection behind the worked example.

Notes

1. Cornell Libraries, Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States (Peter B. Hirtle chart). Pre-1931 cutoff as of 2026. Read it online. ↩
2. 17 U.S.C. 105, subject matter of copyright: United States Government works, Cornell LII. Works of the United States Government. Read it online. ↩
3. Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, 598 U.S. 508 (2023), Justia (No. 21-869). Decision date and vote. Read it online. ↩
4. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Open Access policy (CC0; over 492,000 images; OA icon). Open Access policy. Read it online. ↩
5. Idaho Code 67-6628A, Freedom From AI-Rigged (FAIR) Elections Act, Idaho Legislature. Burden of proof under the statute. Read it online. ↩
6. Library of Congress, Teaching with Primary Sources: analysis tool and teacher's guides (Observe, Reflect, Question; Analyzing Political Cartoons). Analysis tool and teacher's guides. Read it online. ↩
7. National Archives, Center for Legislative Archives, Clifford K. Berryman cartoons (approximately 2,400 drawings; cartoon of April 16, 1908). Collection size and the credit line. Read it online. ↩
8. National Archives, Center for Legislative Archives, Clifford K. Berryman cartoons (approximately 2,400 drawings; cartoon of April 16, 1908). Berryman's newspaper career. Read it online. ↩
9. National Archives Catalog, identifier 306107, The House is in Session (According to the Minority View). Catalog record for the 1908 cartoon. Read it online. ↩
10. National Archives Catalog, identifier 306107, The House is in Session (According to the Minority View). Archive description of the cartoon. Read it online. ↩
11. DocsTeach, Berryman, The Winner (July 16, 1912), National Archives Identifier 6010956. Record for The Winner, July 16, 1912. Read it online. ↩
12. National Archives, America and the World: Foreign Affairs in Political Cartoons, 1898 to 1940 (cover image The Winner, Washington Evening Star, July 16, 1912). Cover credit of the National Archives teaching book. Read it online. ↩
13. 17 U.S.C. 107, limitations on exclusive rights: fair use, Cornell LII. Statutory text and the four factors. Read it online. ↩
14. 17 U.S.C. 107, limitations on exclusive rights: fair use, Cornell LII. Unpublished works clause. Read it online. ↩
15. Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), Justia. Decision date and facts of the parody. Read it online. ↩
16. Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), Justia. Rehnquist opinion and lineup. Read it online. ↩
17. Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), Justia. Holding on emotional distress claims. Read it online. ↩
18. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994), Justia. Decision date, vote and author. Read it online. ↩
19. Wikipedia, Barack Obama 'Hope' poster (AP dispute, January 2011 settlement, 2012 plea), with its cited sources. Hope poster background and the AP dispute. Read it online. ↩
20. NPR, Shepard Fairey and AP settle copyright dispute over Hope poster, January 12, 2011. NPR report of January 12, 2011. Read it online. ↩
21. Wikipedia, Barack Obama 'Hope' poster (AP dispute, January 2011 settlement, 2012 plea), with its cited sources. AP position and Fairey's suit for a declaration. Read it online. ↩
22. Wikipedia, Barack Obama 'Hope' poster (AP dispute, January 2011 settlement, 2012 plea), with its cited sources. October 2009 admission. Read it online. ↩
23. U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York, press release, Shepard Fairey pleads guilty, February 24, 2012. 2009 complaint and the April 2006 National Press Club photograph. Read it online. ↩
24. NPR, Shepard Fairey and AP settle copyright dispute over Hope poster, January 12, 2011. January 2011 settlement terms. Read it online. ↩
25. U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York, press release, Shepard Fairey pleads guilty, February 24, 2012. Plea of February 24, 2012. Read it online. ↩
26. Wikipedia, Barack Obama 'Hope' poster (AP dispute, January 2011 settlement, 2012 plea), with its cited sources. September 2012 sentence. Read it online. ↩
27. Talking Points Memo, Shepard Fairey Gets Probation In Obama Hope Poster Case, September 7, 2012. Report of September 7, 2012 on probation and the fine. Read it online. ↩
28. Wikipedia, Barack Obama 'Hope' poster (AP dispute, January 2011 settlement, 2012 plea), with its cited sources. Judge's remarks about the AP, as reported. Read it online. ↩
29. Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, 598 U.S. 508 (2023), Justia (No. 21-869). Holding and vote in Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith. Read it online. ↩
30. Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, 598 U.S. 508 (2023), Justia (No. 21-869). Dissent. Read it online. ↩
31. Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, 598 U.S. 508 (2023), Justia (No. 21-869). Quoted language of the opinion. Read it online. ↩
32. Cornell Libraries, Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States (Peter B. Hirtle chart). Hirtle chart. Read it online. ↩
33. Cornell Libraries, Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States (Peter B. Hirtle chart). Terms for works from 1978 forward. Read it online. ↩
34. 17 U.S.C. 305, duration of copyright: terms run to the end of the calendar year, Cornell LII. Terms run to the end of the calendar year. Read it online. ↩
35. 17 U.S.C. 105, subject matter of copyright: United States Government works, Cornell LII. Section 105(a). Read it online. ↩
36. Library of Congress, Cabinet of American Illustration (about 4,000 drawings, primarily 1880 to 1910). Cabinet of American Illustration. Read it online. ↩
37. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Open Access policy (CC0; over 492,000 images; OA icon). CC0 release and the OA icon. Read it online. ↩
38. Smithsonian Open Access (more than 5.2 million items). Open access terms. Read it online. ↩
39. Cornell Libraries, Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States (Peter B. Hirtle chart). Term for works published from 1931 through 1963. Read it online. ↩
40. ASCAP, guidance on using music in political campaigns. Performance, synchronization and master licenses. Read it online. ↩
41. Billy Ireland Cartoon Library and Museum, Ohio State University Libraries. The library's self-description. Read it online. ↩
42. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Open Access policy (CC0; over 492,000 images; OA icon). Image count and introduction of Open Access. Read it online. ↩
43. Idaho Code 67-6628A, Freedom From AI-Rigged (FAIR) Elections Act, Idaho Legislature. Title, definition and remedies. Read it online. ↩
44. Idaho Code 67-6628A, Freedom From AI-Rigged (FAIR) Elections Act, Idaho Legislature. Disclosure requirements. Read it online. ↩
45. Idaho Code 67-6628A, Freedom From AI-Rigged (FAIR) Elections Act, Idaho Legislature. History line of the section. Read it online. ↩
46. C2PA, About the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity. The coalition's description of itself. Read it online. ↩
47. Idaho State Archives, Idaho Statesman cartoon (MS 2/1016). Catalog record for the Idaho Statesman cartoon. Read it online. ↩
48. Herb Block Foundation, Report on Editorial Cartooning (December 2011). 2011 Report on Editorial Cartooning. Read it online. ↩
49. Matt Bors, Back to the Drawing Board, Columbia Journalism Review (Fall 2021), republished on Substack. Back to the Drawing Board, Fall 2021. Read it online. ↩
50. The Pulitzer Prizes, Editorial Cartooning winners by year, 1922 to 2020. Editorial Cartooning winners, 1922 to 2020. Read it online. ↩
51. The Pulitzer Prizes, 2022 winners (Illustrated Reporting and Commentary). 2022 winners. Read it online. ↩
52. The Pulitzer Prizes, 2023 winners (Illustrated Reporting and Commentary). 2023 winners. Read it online. ↩
53. The Pulitzer Prizes, 2024 winners (Illustrated Reporting and Commentary). 2024 winners. Read it online. ↩
54. The Pulitzer Prizes, 2025 winners (Illustrated Reporting and Commentary, Ann Telnaes). 2025 winners. Read it online. ↩
55. Herb Block Foundation, Report on Editorial Cartooning (December 2011). Estimate in the 2011 report. Read it online. ↩
56. Matt Bors, Back to the Drawing Board, Columbia Journalism Review (Fall 2021), republished on Substack. Count attributed to the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists. Read it online. ↩