So much for that whole community ownership thing.
Communism is a political theory based on the idea that rights to everything belong to a collective, rather than to any individual. But the copyright holder with rights to this iconic image of Che Guevara is relying on her property in the copyright to claim that this parody infringes on her rights to the image.
Looks like property rights become pretty important when you're the one holding them!
According to the UK Sun:
The daughter of photographer Alberto Korda - who took the iconic 1960 photo of Che - has launched a lawsuit in France, saying that the ruff copy infringes image rights. Stunned designer Kate Polyblank - whose hubby Mark snapped a pal's pet in Acton, West London - says the bone of contention could cost her firm Takkoda £12,000 in legal fees. She said: "It's ridiculous. Clearly anyone can see it is a dog, for goodness sake. At the end of the shoot it ran upstairs and peed on my bed!"
Copyright can still be infringed if the image is not an exact replica. While the question of "copying" remains in flux in this internet age, the value of Polyblank's photo relies entirely on its reference value. The Che-nine even wears a zip-up sweater like the one Guevara sports in the original photo.
The true artistic value in this reference is in the discussion of ownership that has ensued. If there were no property in art, artists would have no incentive to create original work. If artists could not make a living as artists, well -- we'd have a much less interesting view, and many more lousy, frustrated bookkeepers.
Pursue away, copyright holder Korda -- but admit that property is essential to human nature, and communism's attempt to negate human nature is a dead-end.