On Statutes and Liberties

Original Statue of Liberty vs Robert Davidson's Las Vegas replica. Which one is more feminine?

The United States Postal Service made some stamps featuring the Statue of Liberty, but used the "wrong" reference, and now owes an un-attributed artist $3.5 million. I think I'm already using the wrong language here.

The artist, Robert Davidson, made a sculpture of the Statue of Liberty for a New York-themed casino in Las Vegas (can we all just read Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation right now?), and it was this statue, not the original, that the Post Office used to make its stamps.

There's a difference, as you can see above, where one is more feminized. Davidson did that on purpose, and that difference makes it original enough to be protected under fair use law.

Interesting situation here, in that a copy of a copy got in trouble for copying the copy instead of the original, and now owes the copy-creator. But the details get even better, because the USPS licensed the photograph of the Statue from Getty (well I guess they can't just take their own photograph, right?), but they didn't realize that the photo they licensed was of the wrong Statue. Hence Davidson, sculptor of the statue in the photo that was licensed, sues for unauthorized use.

And because the Postal Service sells lots of stamps, there's lots of money involved. There was a good case similar to this involving Artist Shepard Fairey's HOPE Poster, President Barack Obama, Photographer Mannie Garcia, and the Associate Press.


Notes:
Information on Fair Use, Copyright, Intellectual Property, etc.
Electronic Frontier Foundation

Post Office owes $3.5M for using wrong Statue of Liberty 
Jul 2018, Ars Technica

On Property Rights
Feb 2018, Network Address

On Ownership

NASA doesn't get sued, but when it does, it's over property rights.

Tl;dr - 50 years ago, Neil Armstrong gives a 10-yr old a vial of moon dust. Today, 60-yr old 10-yr old girl pre-emptively sues NASA in case she gets charged by NASA for ownership of said dust.

Hmmm, you wonder. Where was I when Neil Armstrong was handing out moon dust? Then you ask, wait a minute, who owns the moon?

NASA owns the moon. Actually not NASA, but the USA owns the moon.

Apparently there's a little black market for space paraphernalia (10's of millions at least), and the SWAT team have been known to work real hard to bust up that market and return such otherworldly items to their rightful owners.

There's a grey area in that little black market, however, which says that 1. Astronauts should be able to do whatever they want with the stuff they bring home, and that 2. There isn't a specific law saying that private persons can't own moon dust.

I don't know enough about property rights to keep this conversation going. But I do harken back to the distant Native Americans' puzzlement about fences and property, and wonder what they would think about this.

Notes:
Woman sues Nasa over ownership of moon dust vial
June 2018, BBC News