Good Artists Borrow, Big Businesses Steal!

As a graphic designer, I spend an absurd amount of time thinking about copyright. Maybe that’s an inevitable side effect of working with found material. Or maybe it’s because I grew up with a lawyer for a dad, which meant hearing more about legal loopholes as a kid than most people will in a lifetime.

Copyright law came up in his anecdotes — like whether a middle school could legally put on Aladdin the Musical or if a branded can of soup could appear on The View. His expertise became my lifeline as my questions got more convoluted. Can I make a collage with a technically non-public-domain photo from a defunct company? How much must I change something for it to be considered fair use? What even is Creative Commons?

After years of badgering, he finally preempted the problem by writing me a nine-page memo breaking down copyright law — what it covers, what it doesn’t, and how to avoid getting sued. While I’m loathe to admit it, I mostly ignored it (sorry, Dad). Not because it wasn’t useful, but because the law has never been the primary factor in deciding what imagery I borrow from.

The Flaws of Copyright Law

That’s because copyright law is a mess. Arbitrary, restrictive, and designed to protect corporations over artists. If you ask most people what copyright is for, they’ll tell you it’s about protecting creators. But that was never its true purpose.

It was meant to incentivize creative work by granting a temporary monopoly to its creator, with the understanding that works would eventually enter the public domain for collective use. When the U.S. first implemented copyright in 1790 (inspired by British law), protection lasted just 14 years, with a single renewal for another 14. Early lawmakers saw copyright as a tradeoff — short-term exclusivity in exchange for long-term public access.

As a federal appeals court put it in Authors Guild v. Google Inc. (2015), “While authors are undoubtedly important intended beneficiaries of copyright, the ultimate, intended beneficiary is the public.” But what was meant to serve creators and the public has been undone.

“Culture, once meant to be shared, is now something to be hoarded — at least when it benefits big businesses.”

The extension of copyright terms has made it increasingly difficult for creative works to become part of the public domain. As a result, contemporary creators face legal and financial barriers that previous generations never encountered.

This shift has disproportionately benefited large corporations that can afford to navigate, enforce, and exploit these extended rights — while independent artists struggle to create without fear of legal repercussions.

Corporate Control Over Creativity

For the next two centuries, copyright terms remained limited. But in 1976, Congress extended them to 75 years or the life of the author plus 50. Then, in 1998, the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act — better known as the ‘Mickey Mouse Protection Act’ — pushed it further: 95 years after publication or the life of the author plus 70.

A temporary incentive was turned into near-permanent control. Culture, once meant to be shared, is now something to be hoarded — at least when it benefits big businesses.

But while corporations work tirelessly to lock down their intellectual property, they’re more than happy to borrow (or outright take) from others. Public domain illustrations are repackaged for book covers without crediting the original artist. AI companies scrape the internet for training data without compensating those who made it.

Small artists are sent cease-and-desist letters, while global brands sell bootleg versions of independent designs. Not all borrowing is the same, and who gets punished for it — or gets away with it — is a matter of power, not principle. The difference between inspiration and infringement, fair use and theft, has never been about law alone — it’s about who holds the legal and financial leverage to make the rules in the first place.

Supporting Independent Artists

Copyright laws favor large corporations at the expense of independent artists and the public domain. To create a more equitable system, we must advocate for fairer copyright terms, support independent creators, and push for legal reforms.

Raise awareness by sharing, and support artists by crediting and compensating them for their work 🎨✊