Call us today0800 160 1298
 
 

Advantage Litigation

Welcome to Advantage Litigation Services. We provide affordable access to commercial litigation.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

Appeal Court photo copyright decision a relief for professional photographers

Posted by on in Uncategorized
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 458
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print

A recent decision by the Court of Appeal in the US, overturning a previous and highly controversial decision regarding unauthorised use of images on the internet, has come as a relief to professional photographers worldwide.

The claim in question involved a company promoting a film festival who used a copyrighted photograph on its website without authorisation or receiving payment from the photographer that took the picture. The original District Judge ruling in Virginia permitted such unauthorised usage of the image under the ‘fair use’ rules, causing uproar amongst professional photographers with concerns over the message that the ruling sent out;- that it is ok to ‘grab and copy’ an image without payment or permission.

The photograph that was used was downloaded from photographer Russell Brammer’s Flickr site and subsequently used by Violent Hues Productions as part of a ‘Plan Your Visit’ page on the website of the Northern Virginia International Film and Music Festival. Violent Hues initially claimed it didn’t know the image was copyrighted, despite Brammer clearly labelling below his image that ‘All rights (are) reserved’ beneath it. The company also claimed the image was significantly altered by further cropping, and that the use was informational and of benefit to festival goers. The Appeal Court ruled though that the cropping was done only to make the proportions of the image match others on the same page and that it didn’t constitute a ‘new expression, meaning or message’. The court also found that had the company paid Brammer for the picture its ability to inform festival goers would not have been hindered.

The decision also made it clear that if such ‘image grabbing’ behaviour became the norm, that professional photography would likely to become ‘dampened’. The Court also added that:

If the ordinary commercial use of stock photography constituted fair use, professional photographers would have little financial incentive to produce their work”

As the internet continues to evolve commercially and ethically, the Appeal decision is particularly important as it underlines that commercial entities and businesses do not have the automatic right to lift images from the Internet to use for their own ends without gaining permission first or paying the photographer. In particular, the Court highlighted how ‘the Internet has made copying as easy as a few clicks of a button’.

Innovative Litigation Funding for Businesses

If you are thinking about suing another company but are worried about the costs of resolving the dispute or going to court, Advantage Litigation Services can help. We have vast experience navigating the different ways of funding commercial dispute resolution and are best placed to help you identify the most appropriate funding option and litigation protection that will best benefit you and your business. Click here to contact us or call 0800 160 1298 to discuss how we can help you manage the risks and find a funding option that works for you.

Get in touch

  1. Your Name(*)
    Please let us know your name.
  2. Your Email(*)
    Please let us know your email address.
  3. Company Name(*)
    Please write a subject for your message.
  4. Your Phone Number
    Invalid Input
  5. Message(*)
    Please let us know your message.
  6. Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Invalid Input

Latest News

  • As well as dominating the recent UK news agenda, it would seem that the new life that the Duke and Duchess of Suffolk are planning is already facing a potential legal battle over the ownership of their ‘Sussex Royal’ trademark. Whilst the ‘Sussex Royal’ brand and trademark has already been registered in the UK, within hours of the high-profile couple’s plans being confirmed recently, an application was filed with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) that, if successful, would result in the applicant owning the ‘Sussex Royal’ trademark in all of the 23 EU-recognised languages. The EUIPO trademark request was in German, with English listed as its second language. The rapid filing covers a range of goods under the name of the couple’s website and Instagram feed, including luggage, toiletries, jewellery and beer. Whilst Harry and Meghan can lodge an objection... Read More

  • Before the Event Insurance – commonly shortened to “BTE”- is an insurance policy that is purchased by a business or individual that is designed to cover legal costs in the event of them needing to make a claim or should a claim be made against them. Whilst you can purchase BTE insurance as a ‘standalone’ policy, it is more commonly included with a range of business or personal insurance products. As with most types of insurance, the cover that a BTE policy provides can vary and is vital that the policy cover, and its limitations, are fully understood before buying a policy. Why should I consider BTE insurance? Legal expenses insurance such as BTE is available so that in the event you require legal advice, the legal expenses insurance will cover the cost of that advice. A solicitor or law firm should... Read More

  • In news that has pleased the stock market in London, litigation funding providers Burford Capital have recently announced that the class action claim made by its investors has been abandoned. The class action claim had originally been made via by New York based investor claims specialists Rosen Law, with the legal action alleging that Burford, one of the world’s largest litigation funders, had made false and/or misleading statements on its financial returns. Burford had strenuously denied making any such false statements and denied that their business was facing financial difficulty. Burford reported to the London Stock Exchange in early January that the US securities action filed in August last year has been withdrawn and dismissed in its entirety. Burford also confirmed that there was no further litigation pending against it at present, other than ‘ordinary course skirmishing’ within a small number... Read More