Andrea Sacchetti, an Italian photography student in trouble for plagiarizing Aida Muluneh – an acclaimed Ethiopian artist and photographer – at Milan Photo Festival 2021 is now facing serious consequences over his overt acts of plagiarism. What’s especially worrying is both its sheer brazenness as well as its display venue: Milan Photo Festival 2021 is set for this display of plagiarized works.
As well, this can serve as an ideal springboard to discuss the difference between inspiration and plagiarism.
Before we get into all that is involved with theft, here is a brief run-down:
Muluneh created an outstanding series of images depicting Dante’s Inferno for an exhibition at the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art, known as 99 Series. Each photograph featured a model painted white and with red hands against a gray background; making an eye-catching image series.
Early this month, African Women in Photography tweeted out that Sacchetti had submitted “eerily similar” work in a group exhibition at Milan Photo Festival – calling it yet another case of theft that was unacceptable and should not have happened.
PetaPixel reports:
The Istituto Italiano Fotografia assigned students to interpret Dante’s Inferno. Sacchetti plagiarized Muluneh without permission or credit and produced several diptychs featuring her painted white with red hands set against gray backgrounds.
Milan Photo Festival released an Instagram statement that now appears to have been removed claiming: “there was no intention to plagiarize from such an acclaimed author and we know that the young photographer has already offered their apologies.”
Apologizing seems a rather weak response, given the similarities between images. Muluneh seems to take an opposing view, noting in her Twitter statement that Sacchetti’s apology does not end the discussion.
Copyright Doesn’t Come Into Play
People often react in such situations by speaking of copyright; however, as I explain in another article only individual works of art can be protected under such an intellectual property arrangement and not concepts or ideas themselves.
Sacchetti could potentially infringe upon Muluneh’s work by printing and displaying copies in Milan; however, as he recreated them himself he holds copyright for these new works created.
Could Muluneh sue him? Perhaps, but such a lawsuit would likely be costly and inconclusive – not unlike how Italian-language law tends to play out when dealing with immoral acts like these.
Inspiration Vs Theft
There is no clear line dividing inspiration from theft; rather it exists along a continuum – most cases lying somewhere along this continuum.
Sacchetti claims in his now-deleted Instagram statement from the Festival that there was “no will to plagiarize,” suggesting instead that Muluneh’s work may have simply served as inspiration.
Herein lies the rub. Herein lies where things turn sour.
Sacchetti could have drawn inspiration from Muluneh without plagiarizing her work:
If he wanted technical practice, he could have replicated her photo as closely as possible–then not shown it publicly. Or for something more artistically driven, he could have used her work as a basis to explore colors, hand placements, subjects and so forth.
But that’s not what happened: the photo in question appears too similar for it not to have been done deliberately, while falling short both technically and artistically.
Muluneh’s work stands out because of its uniqueness. This is not some overdone photographic motif such as double exposure of people in an outdoor scene or selective-color rose photographs; this piece of art stands alone as something truly original and brilliant.
