Back in June 2017, a photo of Donald Trump crashing a wedding at his golf course resort went viral. Jonathan Otto took the photo, shared it with a wedding guest, and it quickly got all over the internet – and ended up in the media. After Otto found it out, he filed a lawsuit. And recently, the court ruled that media using a snapshot from someone’s social network doesn’t constitute a fair use.
If you see a photo freely available online and want to reuse it – you have to ask the photographer for the permission. Some would say this is a common knowledge, right? But the European Court of Justice has recently made this a ruling after a case of copyright infringement. And it all started as a high school student’s presentation.
The US Supreme Court has ruled that online retailers will have to collect sales taxes from now on. For photographers and videographers, this means you no longer will be able to buy cheaper, tax-free gear from online retailers like B&H or Adorama.
Back in January, Canon Italia posted a photo without credit (and shot on a Fuji) on their Instagram and Facebook. The response from the community was fierce, and Canon’s response only made things worse. Now Elia Locardi, the photographer behind the original photo, has decided to take the case to court.
This is one of those stories you couldn’t make up if you tried. Most people, especially content creators, such as those with YouTube followings of 60K+ people know that much of the Internet is copyrighted. That just because an image appears in a Google Images search result does not mean that it’s free to use. It’s just plain common sense. At least, one would think so.
But YouTuber and Internet “entrepreneur” (that word is so overused these days), Dan Dasilva had to learn this the hard way. After stealing a photographer’s work, the photographer, the legal copyright owner, sued him and won. Dan, though, seems to believe he’s the victim n all this. The victim of a “malicious” photographer.
We reported a while ago that the monkey selfie case could come to an end. And finally, this happened. After two years of court battle, David Slater, PETA and Slater’s co-defendant Blurb have reached a settlement. Slater has agreed to donate 25% of any future revenue from the famous selfies to charities that protect the habitats of crested macaques.
Midnight Rider was to be a biographical movie on the journey of Gregg Allman. From struggling artist to the eventual success of the Allman Brothers Band. Then the realisation that he needs to get clean or risk losing his life. It was tragically ironic, then, that filming for this movie actually did cause somebody to lose their life.
On February 20th, 2014, 27 year old camera assistant, Sarah Jones, was hit and killed by a train while filming on tracks. After a three year legal battle, a Savannah court yesterday awarded Jones’ family with $11.2 million. Oddly, though, the court determined that CSX, the train company, are liable for 35% of that, or around $3.92 million.
Photographing and filming the police is an often touchy topic. Mostly due to a lack of education on the part of some police officers. These officers (and it is a tiny minority) seem unaware of the actual laws regarding it. Or, they outright lie and say it is illegal, sometimes to the point of allegedly beating those filming them unsonscious.
Now, a panel of judges fro the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that this falls under the First Amendment. An individual’s right to film police officers in the performance of their duties has constitutional protection. The decision involves two instances where civilians had attempted to film Philadelphia police officers, and were retaliated against.
The news that LagunaBeach requires a permit for shooting in public places has caused a lot of stir. After strong reactions from the public, it turns out that the problem was – inaccurate choice of words.
Laguna Beach Assistant City Manager Christa Johnson told OCWeekly that the permit only applies who photographers and filmmakers who receive compensation for their work. So, the City Council simply changed the “Non-Commercial Photo Permit” to be “Professional Still Photo Permit.” You still need to pay if you want to shoot, but apparently – only if you are paid for photo or video work.
Shooting in public places is generally allowed and you shouldn’t have any problems with the authorities. However, if you plan a photo shoot in the City of Laguna Beach, whether commercial or non-commercial, be ready to file for a permit. Otherwise, you’ll need to pay a fine.
A photographer recently had a photoshoot on the beach, when a ranger approached him. It turned out he needed a permit to take shots, although he was shooting in a public place. A friend of the photographer, Thien Dinh, shared the story with us. Considering this is one of his favorite shooting locations, this affects him too, as well as many other photographers.