Bauret’s family sued Koons over a 1988 sculpture (shown at right) titled Naked, which closely copied a 1975 photograph by Bauret titled Enfants. The black-and-white photograph depicts two naked children holding hands. The Koons sculpture depicts two naked children with body positions and haircuts that are nearly identical to those in the photograph.
One father who live-streamed his partner’s labour on Facebook last May, has found out the hard way: he saw the birth of his son replayed on Good Morning America and numerous other media outlets.
This week, he lost a high-profile court battle against the broadcasters
This infographic looks at what legalities are involved in image manipulation, focusing on US laws whilst also taking a look at UK laws and other factors from around the world. It’ll discuss what aspects can be involved in image manipulation and how the laws are interpreted by different people. At the end, we’ll also take a look at some case examples, delving into how the law has or hasn’t favoured manipulated images.
Photographer Jana Romanova has sued VICE Media for willful copyright infringement and violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) for publishing a photo from her “Waiting” series without permission. Romanova’s suit, filed in the Eastern Distr
alleges that VICE violated her copyright when it published one of her photos of parents-to-be online with an article titled “What It’s Like to Be a Millennial in a Sexless Relationship”
If you’re keeping track today, the score is Big Corporations: 1, Photographers: 1. Because while Carol Highsmith might have all-but-lost her epic lawsuit
Steußloff argued that this practice violates German Copyright Law, and therefore Facebook is bound to stop doing it. In a ruling on February 9th, the court agreed; and since it’s been six months and Facebook has not challenged the ruling, the judgement is considered final.
Three weeks after a federal judge gutted photographer Carol Highsmith’s $1 billion copyright claim against Getty Images, the two sides have ended their dispute with a settlement of the remaining claims. The terms of the settlement, over minor state law claims, were not disclosed.
While the second agreement was more fair to the photographer, it’s notable that Condé Nast tried to get the photographer to sign an unfair agreement in the first place and only offered the photographer a more equitable agreement when they stood up for their rights.
A week after being slapped with a $1 billion copyright-related lawsuit, Getty Images has been served with another suit. This time it’s by Zuma Press, an
Getty allegedly copied roughly 47,048 of Zuma’s photos and made them available for sale through Getty Images after replacing Zuma’s credit with Getty’s.
Zuma Press has sued Getty Images for copyright infringement and falsification of copyright information, the second such lawsuit against Getty in a week.
For the second time in a week, Getty has been hit with a lawsuit claiming misuse of thousands of images. The latest claim, filed by Zuma Press, alleges copyright infringement for unauthorized reproduction, sale and public display of about 47,000 sports images.
Carol Highsmith filed suit July 25 in federal court in New York, alleging that Getty and its subsidiaries have been charging fees for the use of her images without her consent. She has been providing the images to the Library of Congress since 1988 for use by the general public at no charge.
Not only did the media company—recently valued at more than $4 billion—want all of the rights to the photographer’s images, they also wanted the photographer to indemnify Vice Media LLC from any legal action that might result from the use of the images:
Getty says in its claim against Walter A. Kowalczuk, filed June 8 in US District Court in Cleveland, that he and other members of the group allegedly bought and sold images using euphemisms for the sources of those images, such as “Spaghetti” for Getty and “Apples” for Associated Press. Getty says one of its licensing partners reported the Facebook group activity in March.
Photographer Dennis Morris filed a copyright infringement claim last week against appropriation artist Richard Prince in a Los Angeles federal court. The claim is the latest in a growing number of cases filed by photographers accusing Prince of stealing t
Morris, who is based in Los Angeles, is charging Prince with unauthorized use of several photographs of Sid Vicious, the lead singer of the Sex Pistols. Gagosian Gallery, which represents Prince, is also named as a defendant in the case.
The industry has asked the government to modify the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, saying it is outdated and makes removing unauthorized content too difficult.
In recent months, the music world has been united to a rare degree in a public fight against YouTube, accusing the service of paying too little in royalties and asking for changes to the law that allows the company to operate the way it does. The battle highlights the need to capture every dollar as listeners’ habits turn to streaming, as well as the industry’s complicated relationship with YouTube.
This post is a part of our on-going look at pricing photography. The Brief: A photographer recently received a request from a university for a series of photographs for a school publication. The contract that the university sent over indicated that the ph
The messy legal battle surrounding the life’s work of nanny and amateur street photographer Vivian Maier may finally be coming to a close in less than a
Fortunately, this long, drawn-out, complicated legal battle seems to finally be coming to a close. The Chicago Tribune is reporting that the warring parties have reached a “tentative settlement” that will be presented to a judge for approval on May 10th.
Pixsy Founder: Daniel Foster Pixsy is one of the leading reverse image search platforms that helps photographers get compensation for their stolen work. Daniel had reached out to me after I tweeted to a company that used one of my images without my permi
We use reverse image search to find copies, including manipulations, of a photo. From there it is up to the photographer to determine if a displayed use is authorized and if not, what action he or she wishes to take.
