Showing posts with label photographers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label photographers. Show all posts

Friday, October 18, 2024

It Sure Looks Like Trump Watches Are Breaking Copyright Law; Wired, October 18, 2024

 Matt Giles, Wired; It Sure Looks Like Trump Watches Are Breaking Copyright Law

"According to the Associated Press, though, TheBestWatchesonEarth LLC advertised a product it can’t deliver, as that image is owned by the 178-year-old news agency. This week, the AP told WIRED it is pursuing a cease and desist against the LLC, which is registered in Sheridan, Wyoming. (The company did not reply to a request for comment about the cease and desist letter.)

Evan Vucci, the AP’s Pulitzer Prize–winning chief photographer, took that photograph, and while he told WIRED he does not own the rights to that image, the AP confirmed earlier this month in an email to WIRED that it is filing the written notice. “AP is proud of Evan Vucci’s photo and recognizes its impact,” wrote AP spokesperson Nicole Meir. “We reserve our rights to this powerful image, as we do with all AP journalism, and continue to license it for editorial use only.”"

Saturday, January 27, 2024

Richard Prince to Pay Photographers Who Sued Over Copyright; The New York Times, January 26, 2024

Matt Stevens, The New York Times; Richard Prince to Pay Photographers Who Sued Over Copyright

"The artist Richard Prince agreed to pay at least $650,000 to two photographers whose images he had incorporated in his own work, ending a long-running copyright dispute that had been closely monitored by the art world...

Brian Sexton, a lawyer for Prince, said the artist wanted to protect free expression and have copyright law catch up to changing technology...

Marriott said the judgments showed that copyright law still provided meaningful protection to creators and that the internet was not a copying free-for-all.

“There is not a fair use exception to copyright law that applies to the famous and another that applies to everyone else,” he said."

Sunday, December 31, 2023

Photographer Sues Church Over Copyright Infringement; Fstoppers, December 28, 2023

  , Fstoppers; Photographer Sues Church Over Copyright Infringement

"A photographer is taking legal action against a small church in South Carolina for allegedly using his photograph without consent.

Erin Paul Donovan, a photographer from New Hampshire, has initiated a federal lawsuit against Wightman United Methodist Church in Prosperity, South Carolina. Donovan claims that his photograph, depicting New Hampshire’s White Mountains, was used on the church's website without his permission, specifically as a thumbnail for a sermon video dated June 2021...

The suit further alleges that the church not only used the image without authorization but also removed Donovan's copyright notice, name, and watermark from the photograph as it originally appeared on his website."

Sunday, April 3, 2022

She Took the White House Photos. Trump Moved to Take the Profit.; The New York Times, March 31, 2022

 Eric Lipton and  , The New York Times; She Took the White House Photos. Trump Moved to Take the Profit.

"There is no legal prohibition on Mr. Trump assembling and publishing photographs that a White House staff member took during his tenure; under federal law, those photographs are considered in the public domain and not subject to copyright. There is a public Flickr account, now managed by the National Archives, that has 14,995 photos from the Trump White House, a third of them listing Ms. Craighead as the photographer."

Sunday, December 30, 2018

Defending ‘Needles in the Sewer’ and Photographing the Disadvantaged; PetaPixel, December 29, 2018

Simon King, PetaPixel; Defending ‘Needles in the Sewer’ and Photographing the Disadvantaged

[Kip Currier: Thought-provoking article identifying and discussing some of the sticky ethical issues of whether to-photograph or not-to-photograph, particularly regarding vulnerable populations and difficult topics. Kudos to the photographer Simon King for shedding light on his metacognition (i.e. thinking about thinking), with regard to how and when he takes pictures and what he does and does not do with them.

Beyond photography, the issues raised in the piece have broader implications as well for digital age technologies' impacts on disadvantaged communities related to the increasing collection and use of data generated by AI algorithms, mass surveillance, facial recognition, biometric information, etc. The last two paragraphs of a November 2018 New York Times article, Colleges Grapple With Teaching the Technology and Ethics of A.I., provide an example of some of the ways higher education is preparing students to better recognize and address these issues:

David Danks, a professor of philosophy and psychology at Carnegie Mellon, just started teaching a class, “A.I, Society and Humanity.” The class is an outgrowth of faculty coming together over the past three years to create shared research projects, he said, because students need to learn from both those who are trained in the technology and those who are trained in asking ethical questions.

“The key is to make sure they have the opportunities to really explore the ways technology can have an impact — to think how this will affect people in poorer communities or how it can be abused,” he said.]



"The main issues people brought up about this image were consent and exploitation...

My responsibility (and maybe yours?) as a photographer is to avoid self-censorship. I can always choose to publish an image or not, but only if that image exists in the first place. If I take an image then I should have the presence of mind to understand what I saw in that scene, and what purpose I want to apply to that image. If I had not taken an image at this time would that be a form of erasing and ignoring this issue? I would rather face discussion and debate about my work than to talk as if these issues are distant and abstract.

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I’d like to direct some of the attention from this topic and image to the website Addaction. It’s a UK-based organization providing aid and outreach to at-risk addicts. Please consider having a look at their website and possibly making a donation, or maybe going out of your way to produce an image that may also draw attention to this topic."

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Copyright vs. Conscience: Lawyering Up Isn’t Always the Right Move; PetaPixel, August 21, 2018

Blair Bunting, PetaPixel; Copyright vs. Conscience: Lawyering Up Isn’t Always the Right Move

"You read stories about photographers going after copyright abuse all the time, and it’s nearly always justified. In this case, I hope you can agree with me that seeking monetary compensation through legal recourse was not the right move. Sometimes you have to step back and remember that this may be a business, but it’s a business that relies on people. Once in a while, you have to remember that everyone featured in a photograph is a human, and as such all deserve compassion.

Rest in peace, Old Man."

Monday, June 6, 2016

Guns N' Roses' Axl Rose is trying to get a 'fat photo' off the Internet; CNet, 6/5/16

Aloysius Low, CNet; Guns N' Roses' Axl Rose is trying to get a 'fat photo' off the Internet:
"What would you do if you were the lead singer of Guns N' Roses and some young punks on the Internet used a photo of you to make fat jokes? Well, Axl Rose thinks the best way to deal is to wipe all traces of the picture off the web, and he's starting with Google...
Interestingly, the copyright for the original image is tricky. While TorrentFreak did hunt down the original photographer to check if Axl Rose has the right to take down the image, Web Sheriff, the company performing the takedown, says that photographers at the singer's show sign an agreement transferring copyright ownership to his company."