Legal matters aside this is quite interesting from moral point of view. Sure, 30 years is long and 150k USD is a lot, but where one draws the line? I imagine t

Legal matters aside this is quite interesting from moral point of view. Sure, 30 years is long and 150k USD is a lot, but where one draws the line? I imagine that photographer would like to earn money for the photo he took. Probably such photographer only has couple of those shot throughout lifetime and it’s quite obvious he’s trying to make a living out of it. One could criticize greediness and time, but should it be 1$ and 1 day instead? On the other hand we have tattoo artist that reproduced 1:1 photo to skin. It probably was hard and required a lot of skill and experience. My guess is that artist should have the source material. Should they create all of it? If not should they have permission of the source material? And there is third side - using sourced work as a marketing material. Would drawing straight rectangle both on client’s arm and showing it on photo of “work in progress” had the same marketing effect as using famous photo? Instagram brings money too and this specific piece of work was used to boost it. I understand the need and also myself I would like art to be free, but in the end artist (such as photographer or tattoo artist) has to eat, I’m not really sure how one could settle this without a fight though.