6 ms·

The problem is that they let him take pictures of them in the first place without any restrictions. But they fixed that now. The 'I am a photographer and a lawy

• PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  > The problem is that they let him take pictures of them in the first place without any restrictions. I don't think that was the problem.
  • DanBC 8y ago
    It's clearly the problem: the band thought they owned image rights. The photographer had a different understanding.
    • ozgurozkan 8y ago
      Most people think like this: I have my face on that photo so that photo is mine not the photographer's. Photographer has rights to distribute, sell do whatever until the limit that is not harming the subject in the photo. In this case it is an artist she can only sue him if that photo harms her reputation. Instead her attitude harmed her reputation.
      • 1337biz 8y ago
        You can use the pictures for documentation/private use but unless you have an explicit agreement you can't use the pictures for commercial purpose. Otherwise, Nike could put up a sign 'All images here belong to us' in their store, photograph the next celebrity walking into their store and then use the picture of the celebrity in all promotion material without their endorsement.
        • cthalupa 8y ago
          The primary reason for that is because that would imply endorsement. Conversely, if Nike photographs the next celebrity walking into their store and posts it on their instagram, that celebrity's sponsor can't grab that picture and then make it a link to their store.