Just over a year ago, we reported on a lawsuit filed by Nikon against Zeiss and ASML. They accused the two companies of using Nikon’s patented lithography tech without permission or licenses. Now, a court has ruled that Zeiss and ASML did not infringe upon Nikon’s patent, and has ordered Nikon to pay €475,000 in court fees.
In the era of the internet, it’s not at all uncommon to find your photos used by someone else without your permission. This happened to Edward Kelly of Marlton, New Jersey, who found his selfie used in an ad. On Pornhub. To make things even worse, it seems that the ad has been on the largest pornography website for at least six years. So, when discovering this, Kelly decided to file a lawsuit against Pornhub, seeking more than $3 million in damages and compensation for the use of his photo.
This isn’t so much a photography post, but it is related. As many photographers use Apple MacBook computers, we thought it was worth talking about. Hopefully, it will help some of the MacBook users who might be reading this and are affected by this issue.
It was only a couple of weeks ago that Apple was hit with an 8 count class action suit over an allegedly flawed “butterfly” keyboard design used in MacBook models since 2015. It claims that the company knew about defects with these keyboards before the product’s launch. Now, Apple faces a second class action suit over the keyboards, claiming that they are in breach of five more laws.
A woman from Cobb County has recently filed a lawsuit against a photographer who covered her daughter’s high school dance. The 15-year-old girl had a wardrobe malfunction which left her exposed. The photographer captured it, and the mother was horrified to discover that the photo ended up on his website for sale. So, she decided to sue, and it’s reported that it will be multi-million dollar lawsuit.
Six months ago, Israeli start-up, Corephotonics filed suit against Apple over alleged patent infringement. Essentially they claimed that the iPhone 7 Plus used dual camera technology by infringing on their patents (one, two, three, four). Now Apple faces a second claim from Corephotonics claiming that the iPhone 8 Plus and iPhone X also infringe on their technology.
Corephotonics says that the company actually met with Apple to discuss their technology. They allege that Apple refused to enter into an agreement. That Apple simply used the technology described during their meeting anyway without any sort of licensing arrangement. They even claim that Apple’s negotiator boasted they could infringe without fear of reprisal.
Unfortunately, plagiarism is not at all rare in the world of photography and filmmaking. But Cara Neo, also known as Syrena, Singapore’s First Mermaid has had her work and even her identity plagiarized in the most outrageous way. A group who was part of the Creator Collective – Asia program contacted her to work together, but she refused. This didn’t stop them to rip off her video and even hire someone to impersonate her in a fake interview. And what makes the situation even more bizarre – this video brought them the first prize in this year’s Creator Collective competition. We got in touch with Cara and she told us how this came to happen.
One of the most ridiculous and the most famous cases is finally solved: no, monkeys can’t own the copyright to the photos they snapped accidentally. To remind you, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently refused to dismiss the case. It has now ruled that crested macaque named Naruto doesn’t have legal standing to file a copyright claim against photographer David Slater.
When PETA and David Slater reached the settlement over the famous “monkey selfie case,” we thought it was finally over. Well, it appears that it wasn’t. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has refused the request to dismiss the case. In other words, we’ll soon hear an official appellate decision about the famous selfie.
I guess we all know the viral Grumpy Cat, the spirit animal of many of us (especially on Monday mornings). In 2015, a beverage company used Grumpy Cat’s name and image without a license, and the kitty’s owner Tabatha Bundesen decided to file a lawsuit. On Monday, the court ruled in her favor and she was awarded $710,001 in damages.
In 2014, photographer Lawrence Schwartzwald sent 49 prints to German publisher Steidl, hoping to publish them as a book. When he requested the return of his prints, it turned out that the publisher had lost them. After extensive litigation, a German court has still ordered Steidl to return the prints to the photographer.