5 ms·

I don't get it - the guy made a pics of TV show and tried to sue TV show owner for using his pics?

by gesman 9y ago

cookingrobot 9y ago
From my reading - the guy is a sports photographer, and CBS used his pictures in a news cast without his permission, so he is suing for $150k. In retaliation, CBS found some old social media post he made that included an image from one of their old cowboy shows. So they’re suing back for $150k, and calling him a hypocrite.
tehwebguy 9y ago
For perspective each screen cap is something like 1/30,000th of the episode (visual portion only), versus the photo CBS used is the entire creative work.
- ada1981 9y ago
  Is this a standard they use? What if he had shot video of the whole game? That photo might be 1/30,000 of the game.
  - tehwebguy 9y ago
    Yeah it is a factor, among others.
  - Drakim 9y ago
    The amount of the original work used is a very important aspect of fair use. If I write a movie review of The Matrix and include a screenshot of Neo dodging bullets, that's your typical fair use. The reason for this is obvious, the screenshot is there for review purposes, maybe to show off the thematic feel of the movie in my review. But if I do a YouTube video review of The Matrix and then include the entirely of movie, it's not fair use. I could maybe show a scene or two, but I can't just wholesale copy paste the movie and call it fair use. After all, if that was okay, you could "legally pirate" anything by just having a 5 second review before the movie.
    - tryingagainbro 9y ago
      The amount of the original work used is a very important aspect of fair use. After you spend a fortune helping a judge decide. CBS has the money, "you" don't.
  - nkrisc 9y ago
    The game isn't the copyrighted work, the photo is.
- iAMAGuest 9y ago
  > entire creative work Not making judgement on your comment but judgement on this issue. Personally, I don't think just taking a photo of a person is creative work as it has little intellectual, creative, or artistic value. These are the premises which copyright was formed to protect. As a side note, it would be interesting to understand what conditions this photo was taken under, if it was taken with or without permission, and whether it was taken on private or public property.
  - tehwebguy 9y ago
    > Personally, I don't think just taking a photo of a person is creative work as it has little intellectual, creative, or artistic value. It seems one would have to be unaware of the challenges of lighting, shutter speed, lens distance, color grading, editing and much more to believe that.
    - iAMAGuest 9y ago
      yet walking down the street and taking a picture of Kevin Spacey walking on the other side of the street is also copyright'ed. There is no artistic form in that, there is no creativity, or even intellectual effort. To clarify my previous comment a little more, "I don't think "simply" taking a photo of a person is creative work". But I also are aligned with you somewhat, that when there is effort there is creative work.
delinka 9y ago
Nope. The guy makes pics for a living. CBS took those pics (each an entire copyrighted work) and used them without permission. The guy took screenshots of a TV show (themselves a sample of an entire copyrighted work, entirely permissible under fair use) and used them in some way.

I don't get it - the guy made a pics of TV show and tried to sue TV show owner for using his pics?

by gesman 9y ago

I don't get it - the guy made a pics of TV show and tried to sue TV show owner for using his pics?

From my reading - the guy is a sports photographer, and CBS used his pictures in a news cast without his permission, so he is suing for $150k. In retaliation, CBS found some old social media post he made that included an image from one of their old cowboy shows. So they’re suing back for $150k, and calling him a hypocrite.

tehwebguy 9y ago

For perspective each screen cap is something like 1/30,000th of the episode (visual portion only), versus the photo CBS used is the entire creative work.

ada1981 9y ago
Is this a standard they use? What if he had shot video of the whole game? That photo might be 1/30,000 of the game.
- tehwebguy 9y ago
  Yeah it is a factor, among others.
- Drakim 9y ago
  The amount of the original work used is a very important aspect of fair use. If I write a movie review of The Matrix and include a screenshot of Neo dodging bullets, that's your typical fair use. The reason for this is obvious, the screenshot is there for review purposes, maybe to show off the thematic feel of the movie in my review. But if I do a YouTube video review of The Matrix and then include the entirely of movie, it's not fair use. I could maybe show a scene or two, but I can't just wholesale copy paste the movie and call it fair use. After all, if that was okay, you could "legally pirate" anything by just having a 5 second review before the movie.
  - tryingagainbro 9y ago
    The amount of the original work used is a very important aspect of fair use. After you spend a fortune helping a judge decide. CBS has the money, "you" don't.
- nkrisc 9y ago
  The game isn't the copyrighted work, the photo is.
iAMAGuest 9y ago
> entire creative work Not making judgement on your comment but judgement on this issue. Personally, I don't think just taking a photo of a person is creative work as it has little intellectual, creative, or artistic value. These are the premises which copyright was formed to protect. As a side note, it would be interesting to understand what conditions this photo was taken under, if it was taken with or without permission, and whether it was taken on private or public property.
- tehwebguy 9y ago
  > Personally, I don't think just taking a photo of a person is creative work as it has little intellectual, creative, or artistic value. It seems one would have to be unaware of the challenges of lighting, shutter speed, lens distance, color grading, editing and much more to believe that.
  - iAMAGuest 9y ago
    yet walking down the street and taking a picture of Kevin Spacey walking on the other side of the street is also copyright'ed. There is no artistic form in that, there is no creativity, or even intellectual effort. To clarify my previous comment a little more, "I don't think "simply" taking a photo of a person is creative work". But I also are aligned with you somewhat, that when there is effort there is creative work.

delinka 9y ago

Nope. The guy makes pics for a living. CBS took those pics (each an entire copyrighted work) and used them without permission. The guy took screenshots of a TV show (themselves a sample of an entire copyrighted work, entirely permissible under fair use) and used them in some way.