Is Richard Prinz an Artist?

The following article from the national newspaper: "The Guardian", explores some of the controversy around the work of Richard Prinz. He uses many pieces of photographic work from other photographic artists and adjusts/modulates them, sometimes very minimally. Many of his pieces, at least at a superficial visual scan look very much like the original pieces of work and this invites criticism regarding copyright, appropriation, fraud and whether his work is really his work.
For example, this exhibition below is by Prinz, comprising of images taken from instagram shots with no permission for their use. It created a typical controversy about whether it was his work, and money he was making from these images wasn't reasonable or legitimate. The images were marginally modified by increasing their size and applying them to canvas and adding some script or imojis at the bottom of them.

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/jan/04/richard-prince-sued-copyright-infringement-rastafarian-instagram

The following article summarizes some of the debate about the work, or appropriated work of Richard Prinz. He appears to be a notorious and disliked person in the photography world. The article articulates the difficulty most struggling photographers have in pursuing a case in court, because of cost and the fact that a tried case was won by Prinz on the grounds that he had sufficiently modified to make it a "different" image. If the case against Prinz is not legally upheld it does appear that there may be a moral case. He does not pay for any copyright to those that have profoundly contributed to his work. This seems a large part of the resentment toward Prinz that is building up in the industry.

https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2015/05/21/why-so-many-photographers-hate-richard-prince/


Class discussion concluded mostly that Prinz was not a true artist because of the amount of used imagery and wasn't even an attempted copy by using the same content and composition, a style that many artists use. His attitude of not being interested to consult the original artists and not caring what the original artists think, feel or say adds fuel to the growing dislike of him as an artist. My personal view is that he is not an artist but a clever business man who collects or replicates others work and sells it on.