Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Photography Business
BOOM! Someone finally sticks it to Getty
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Browncoat" data-source="post: 222489" data-attributes="member: 1061"><p>Just in case you don't feel like reading the whole thing, here's the summary:</p><p></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'">The $1.2 million was the maximum statutory penalty available under the Copyright Act, Baio said. AFP had asked for the award to be set at $120,000.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'">During the trial, Marcia Paul, a lawyer for Getty, said Morel was asking the jury "to make him the best paid news photographer on the planet."</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'">Joshua Kaufman, a lawyer for AFP, blamed the infringement on an innocent mistake and said the Twitter user who posted Morel's photos without attribution bore responsibility for the error. The AFP editor, Kaufman said, believed the pictures were posted for public distribution.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'">AFP filed the lawsuit in 2010 against Morel, seeking a declaration that it had not infringed on his copyrights, after Morel accused it of improper use. Morel then filed his own counterclaims.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'">AFP had initially argued that Twitter's terms of service permitted the use of the photos. But Nathan found in January that the company's policies allowed posting and "retweeting" of images but did not grant the right to use them commercially.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'georgia'"></span></span></p><p>Point 1: Getty Images basically says that photography isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Point 2: AFP basically says they thought that photos posted to Twitter were free for the taking. This is a very big victory for working photographers. Huge.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Browncoat, post: 222489, member: 1061"] Just in case you don't feel like reading the whole thing, here's the summary: [COLOR=#000000][FONT=georgia]The $1.2 million was the maximum statutory penalty available under the Copyright Act, Baio said. AFP had asked for the award to be set at $120,000. During the trial, Marcia Paul, a lawyer for Getty, said Morel was asking the jury "to make him the best paid news photographer on the planet." [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=georgia]Joshua Kaufman, a lawyer for AFP, blamed the infringement on an innocent mistake and said the Twitter user who posted Morel's photos without attribution bore responsibility for the error. The AFP editor, Kaufman said, believed the pictures were posted for public distribution. [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=georgia]AFP filed the lawsuit in 2010 against Morel, seeking a declaration that it had not infringed on his copyrights, after Morel accused it of improper use. Morel then filed his own counterclaims. [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=georgia]AFP had initially argued that Twitter's terms of service permitted the use of the photos. But Nathan found in January that the company's policies allowed posting and "retweeting" of images but did not grant the right to use them commercially. [/FONT][/COLOR] Point 1: Getty Images basically says that photography isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Point 2: AFP basically says they thought that photos posted to Twitter were free for the taking. This is a very big victory for working photographers. Huge. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Photography Business
BOOM! Someone finally sticks it to Getty
Top