Green Day Wins In Court

8/23/2011 2:30 AM ET | Filed under: Legal Matters • Green Day

In 2009, Green Day used a work of art (pictured above) for their own creative use which caught the angry attention of artist David Seltzer.

The artist sued the band for "stealing" his "frightened, fang-toothed face" for their own professional use.

Unfortunately for Seltzer, he ended up being the one who won the battle for Green Day.

During his testimony, David vented:

[T]ainted the original message of the image and made it now synonymous with lyrics, a video, and concert tour that it was not originally intended to be used with. I make an image, I produce it, I tailor it to my needs, the concept, the content, and then someone comes along, defaces the image, puts a red cross on it. I mean, maliciously devalues the original intent and then shows it to thousands upon thousands of people.

The rules of fair use are tricky ones and when David testified, he opened the door for the judge to find Green Day's use a "transformative."

By saying the art's meaning had changed and was used for a different purpose, the judge found Green Day innocent.

Judge Gutierrez concluded:

Given the fundamentally different purposes of the two works, Staub's use of a modified version of the Scream Icon image in the East Jesus Nowhere video backdrop cannot reasonably be deemed a market substitute for Plaintiff's original Scream Icon image.

Tough break, Seltzer!

What do U think of the court's decision?

[Image via WENN/David Seltzer.]

Tags: art, david seltzer, fair use, frightened fang toothed face, green day, lawsuit

Email this »

See All 8 Comments

8 comments to “Green Day Wins In Court”

raccoon baby says – reply to this

1

that's bullshit. it's not their work, they shouldn't use it without permission. that law is stupid.
Jackay00 says – reply to this

2

sounds like crap
bleahf says – reply to this

3

Green day band should be ashamed. What if someone came and stole a whole melody of their songs and changed just the lyrics and prolly some notes to make it go for a different meaning…. I bet they wouldnt like it!.
This was unfair, the artist has been damaged… perhaps emotionaly more than anything, it was his work!.
OhJustPickOne says – reply to this

4

That's bullshit, it doesn't matter what they used his artwork for, if they stole it, they stole it. And Green Day of all people, I expect more from them, you can't have morals just sometimes, if you're portraying yourself as a band with morals, you have to have it ALL the time, especially towards a fellow artist. Like someone already said, what if I took one of their songs and made it my own, changed the meaning a little.. would THEY let it slide? Wouldn't that be stealing then? Great, now that we've established what's stealing and what's not, I TRULY hope people start using their music without their permission, shame on them!!
elfslayer says – reply to this

5

Artists discard their work because they don't like it. Some in the publiceye will come along and use this piece of art. Artists will allow this because they don't like it. Then it becomes something slightly iconic (even if only amongst fans of the person using it) and then suddenly 'It was stolen, it was my soul on canvas, blah fucking blah'.
blackrabbitinle says – reply to this

6

Honestly, I think that Artists should get the same fair rights as a Music Artist. You can't hardly even listen to the music on the radio without it being copyrighted anymore— you can't put the music in the background of a video you post on youtube without it being copyrighted. Fair is only fair. I blame the record labels for wanting their cut.
GeenDay says – reply to this

7

@bleahf "What if someone came and stole a whole melody of their songs and changed just the lyrics and prolly some notes to make it go for a different meaning…. I bet they wouldnt like it!." - They had their demo tapes for the new album "Cigarettes and Valentines" stolen
@OhJustPickOne "Like someone already said, what if I took one of their songs and made it my own, changed the meaning a little.. would THEY let it slide?" - Yes, they let it slide. They released "American Idiot" instead.
MoonJoy says – reply to this

8

Actually, I hear that Seltzer sold his picture to a company, and Green Day got it from that company when they prepared their tour. So, in other words, Seltzer may not have read the small print that gave the right to this company to resell his art. Green Day may have gotten it in good will after all.
Also, saying the picture became synonymous with the tour is exaggerated. It was severely altered (why is the altered picture not shown here?) to the point I would not have recognized it, and used as a backdrop for ONE song in an entire set of, what, some twenty song? C'mon. It's hardly synonymous with the whole tour. There is no video for East Jesus Nowhere, and the little we see in the live DVD is not enough to support Seltzer's point.