essay 代写：案例
Art Rogers是一名专业的摄影师，他曾经拍过照片，然后卖出去赚钱，然后在他的画廊里展示他的作品，就像他最初创作的作品一样。所有创作原创作品的艺术家都享有著作权，任何单位不得在不承认原创作者或未经作者许可的情况下，为个人利益使用同一作品。阿特·罗杰斯拍了一张8只小狗和一男一女坐在长椅上的照片，做成了一张黑白照片。他称这张照片为“小狗”，并在许多贺卡和其他非专利商品上使用了这张照片。罗杰斯从这幅画中获利颇丰，他拍下了这幅画，并成为这幅画的创作者。杰夫·昆斯是一位著名的当代艺术家，他偶然看到罗杰斯拍摄的这张照片，便想到用雕塑来复制这张照片。
essay 代写：案例
在昆斯的雕塑中，除了女人耳朵后面的花、小狗撅着鼻子的鼻子、颜色和男人头上的花，罗杰的照片有惊人的相似之处。昆斯在1988年创作了这幅特别的作品，他称之为“一串小狗”。他以36.7万美元的价格卖出了三版，并获得了可观的利润。第二年，也就是1989年，罗杰斯在《洛杉矶时报》的周日日历版上看到了这尊雕塑，他马上就认出了昆斯的雕塑和他多年前拍摄的那幅原创画之间的相似之处。罗杰斯对昆斯提起诉讼，要求获得37万5千美元和250万美元的惩罚性赔偿(Copyright.laws.com, 2015)。昆斯辩解说，这幅作品只是对当代艺术的拙劣模仿，是一种幽默的社会评论形式，并非完全侵权。
essay 代写：案例
Art Rogers is a professional photographer who used to take pictures and sell it for a profit and use it in his gallery by showcasing his work as the work created originally by him. All artists who create original work are granted copyright, and an entity cannot use the same work for his or her personal gain without acknowledging the original creator or taking permission from the creator. Art Rogers clicked a picture of 8 puppies with a man and a women sitting on a bench and made it a black and white photo. He called the picture ‘Puppies’ and used the picture on numerous greeting cards and other generic merchandise (National Coalition against Censorship, 2008). Rogers made good profit from the picture, which he took it and was the creator of the picture. Jeff Koons is a renowned contemporary artist came across the picture taken by Rogers, and thought of making a replica of the same by using a sculpture.
essay 代写：案例
There is striking resemblance of Roger’s photo in the sculpture made by Koons, except the flowers behind the ears of the women, the pouting noses of the puppies, the colours, and the flower on the man’s head. This particular work of art made by Koons was made in 1988 and he called it ‘String of Puppies’. He sold three editions of the sculpture for $367,000 and made significant profit. Following year, in 1989, Rogers came across the sculpture in the Sunday calendar section of the Los Angeles Times, and immediately recognised the resemblance between Koons sculpture and his original picture that he took years back. Rogers filed a lawsuit against Koons and demanded $375,000 and $2.5 million in punitive damages (Copyright.laws.com, 2015). Koons defended that the work was just a parody in contemporary art and was termed as a humorous form of social commentary and not complete infringement.