Celebrity Clashes with Image Law

Five controversial cases between celebrities and photographers.

Berlin, 23 October 2017: We all have the right to privacy thanks to the law. However, it seems the more well-known you are the less people care about your privacy. So, it’s little surprise that the media is flooded with stories with celebrities battling against tabloids to defend their right of privacy. But keep in mind you don’t have to be famous to have your privacy invaded. Copytrack presents five standout cases where celebrities got caught up in a media storm of copyright and privacy law.

1. Yes, Rasta French photographer Patrick Cariou takes on Richard Prince

Back in 2000, French photographer Patrick Cariou published the book Yes, Rasta, which included a collection of his photos of the Jamaican Rastafarian community. Eight years after the initial publication, New York based artist Richard Prince then reprinted his own edited version for his exhibition Canal Zone. Prince’s work was then displayed and sold at the Gagosian Gallery based in New York. It didn’t take long for the question of copyright to arise with Cariou suing for infringement in 2009. The initial ruling from the New York court was in favour of Cariou, stating that Prince was infringing and not “commenting upon” the originals and as consequence his works must be unsold. Not giving up the fight, Prince appealed for Second Circuit. The Second Circuit then reversed the previous ruling, finding that 25 of the 30 works were “transformative” enough for fair use. Finally, in 2014, Cariou and Prince announced that they had settled the case.

 2. Jenner Sisters Ill-mannered T-shirts 

Sisters Kylie and Kendall Jenner released their collection of vintage shirts on the market, the shirts included overlaid images of the girls on top of the legendary rappers Tupac and Biggie. It didn’t take long before the Jenners were criticized for their actions. Amongst those upset was the mother of the Notorious B.I.G who was furious and believed the y disrespected her son. The sisters apologised, but it wasn’t enough. Well-known photographer, Michael Miller, went on to sue the Jenners for infringement of copyright. He claimed that the collection included original photos of the deceased artists that were inappropriately used and illegally used commercial for their clothes. The Tupac images used belonged to Miller, and the Kylie + Kendell label never even informed the photographer about their intentions to print the image. The Jenner label also didn’t have the approval to use image. Miller is now suing the brand for a total of $150,000 for each image used. 

3. Khloe Kardashian accused of image theft for paparazzi photo

It’s well known that paparazzi often have a bad reputation when it comes to the law and respecting privacy. However, in this case the paparazzi weren’t the bad guys. It all started when Khloe Kardashian posted a photo of herself on Instagram, which just happened to be taken by the paparazzi. As she used the image without the permission of the author, who happened to be one of the paps, she now has to pay damages.  Xposure Photos, who owned the image didn't turn a blind eye, especially since Kardashian posted the picture without any copyright information. Kardashian’s  post also caused a problem  because a publication had legally acquired the photo series and published it shortly before Kardashian. Thanks to the Kardashian’s 64 million followers, as soon as the image was posted it lost its exclusivity and therefore its value. The damages total up to $150,000, which Chole is now expected to pay. 

4. A happy ending to Obama Hope Poster trial 

The subject of this lawsuit is the world-famous Hope Poster that features Barack Obama. It was designed by artist Shepard Fairey, who tangled up in a copyright dispute with the major news agency Associated Press (AP) over the poster. The agency claimed that they owned the rights of the original image as one of their photographers had taken the image. The AP turned to the artist's lawyer in an attempt for a legal settlement, but Fairey turned around and sued the AP.  He wanted to prove that he had acted within the framework of the Fair Use principle of the US copyright law and therefore his usage was not unlawful. Due to lying in court, and destroying evidence Fairey nearly lost the court case. Among other things, Fairey claimed he didn’t use the image from the AP. He went on to apologise for his actions. Despite the dispute the artist and the press agency finally decided on a settlement. During the settlement, the artist promised not to use any images of the AP without a license. Both parties agreed to share the rights to the Hope Poster in the future. There was also a financial agreement made between both parties. The story now has a happy ending, with both parties aiming to create a joint poster series based on the AP photos.

5. German Football coach caught up in mean gossip 

In Germany, Funke-Media had to pay the coach of the German national football team, Jogi Loew, compensation of 220,000 Euros due to 11 misleading articles. This was all ruled by the Cologne Regional Court. In 2016, after the European Championship the media group printed Loew three times on the front pages of their gossip magazines. The company Funke-Media also reported about Loew on holiday and even speculated about his love life with various women - including his own goddaughter. The amount of compensation determined by the court was 100,000 EUR higher than what Loew initially demanded. The court justified this due to frequency of the coverage and the strong assumptions about Loew’s love life. The articles had significantly intruded on the trainer's right of privacy, despite his attempt to avoid the media on his holiday. According to the Court, the media group had acted unprofessionally. The Court went on to say that the company knew that the speculations were inaccurate and illegal. The Funke-Media group has tried to appeal the initial ruling.

Mary Eising, Oranienburger Straße  4, 10178 Berlin, Germany
mary.eising@copytrack.com, Tel: +49 – 30 – 809.332.933, Fax: +49 – 30 – 809.332.999

About Copytrack:

Copytrack (www.copytrack.com) was founded in 2015 by Marcus Schmitt and currently employs around 25 people from legal, IT, customer service and finance. The service supports photographers, publishers, image agencies and e-commerce providers. It includes a risk-free search of the global Internet for image and graphics data uploaded by users at Copytrack are found with a hit accuracy of 98 per cent. The customers define if images are used without a license and even determine the amount of subsequent fees supported by an automatic license calculator on the portal. Copytrack is fully responsible for an out-of-court solution in over 140 countries as well as a legal solution in the areas relevant to copyright law. If the image has been successfully licensed, the rights holder receives up to 70 percent of the agreed sum. The pure search function is free of charge.

Tags:

About Us

COPYTRACK (www.COPYTRACK.com) wurde 2015 von Marcus Schmitt gegründet und beschäftigt heute rund 25 Mitarbeiter aus den Bereich Legal, IT, Kundenservice und Finance. Der Service richtet sich u.a. an Fotografen, Verlage, Bildagenturen und e-commerce-Anbieter und umfasst eine risikofreie Durchsuchung des weltweiten Internets nach von den Nutzern bei COPYTRACK hochgeladenen Foto- und Grafikdaten mit einer Treffergenauigkeit von 98 Prozent. Die Kunden definieren ohne Lizenz genutzte Bilder und bestimmen selbst die Höhe nachträglicher Gebühren gestützt durch einen automatischen Lizenzrechner auf dem Portal. COPYTRACK übernimmt in voller Verantwortung eine außergerichtliche Lösung in 140 Ländern sowie eine gerichtliche Lösung in den urheberrechtlich relevanten Gebieten. Nur bei erfolgreicher Nachlizensierung erhält der Rechteinhaber bis zu 70 Prozent der vereinbarten Summe. Die reine Suchfunktion ist kostenfrei.

Subscribe

Documents & Links