Photographer is sued $1.22 million over topless photo on top of Empire State Building

10 years 2 months ago #347269 by KENT MELTON
So the photographer says this photo was spontaneous, and was taken with cell phone.  I don't get how the owners of the Empire State building came up with the $1.22 million figure to sue.  Seems like one of those cases that will get tossed out.  But still interesting, we need to think about where we are shooting our models now too!

www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-14/photograp...allen-henson/5199664  



Photo Comments
,
10 years 2 months ago #347303 by icepics
There are kids standing right there, and even if there weren't, people aren't allowed to go up to the observation tower and start taking their clothes off, it's a shared space for visitors and tourists and the general public. If he wanted to shoot a partly nude subject he'd need permission and would need to schedule to use the space when it's not being used by the public.

Seems like he's used the photo to promote himself all over the internet so I don't know if that will be considered using it for his business or not.

Sharon
Photo Comments
,
10 years 2 months ago #347327 by Josh Jofoto
Hmmm seems like a wishy washy waste of the courts time if you ask me

Canon 7D | Canon EF-S 18-55 IS | Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 | Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro | CanonEF 17-40 f/4 L | 70-200 f/4 L | 580 EX II
,
10 years 2 months ago #347333 by StephanieW
Seems pretty pricey for the crime to me. I understand there are laws (and whether or not I agree that this is something that should be criminal isn't the point), but that price tag does not match the crime. Maybe a couple of hundred dollars at most.


,
10 years 2 months ago #347343 by Hassner
The creative quality of the photograph is a crime. To break the law for a crappy image like that...


This person is a posting maniac and deserves a #1 badge!Top Poster
No one kicks up there feet next to the water cooler better than this person.  Top poster - LoungeLounge Guru
Photo Comments
,
10 years 2 months ago #347397 by StephanieW

Hassner wrote: The creative quality of the photograph is a crime. To break the law for a crappy image like that...


lol well when phrased like that maybe I can see how the price tag fits.  The judge was making a statement on art.  :P


,
10 years 2 months ago #347441 by Yasmine Rossi
The photographer shouldn't have done that, but is that worth $1.22 million suit?  NO.


,
10 years 2 months ago #347479 by TCooper
Doesn't the Empire State Building make enough from tourist as it is?


Photo Comments
,
10 years 2 months ago #347499 by Stealthy Ninja
Ah America. :patriot:
,
10 years 2 months ago #347515 by garyrhook

TCooper wrote: Doesn't the Empire State Building make enough from tourist as it is?


Not at all sure how that's relevant.

What makes no sense is that it was private property. So, if someone comes into my yard without my permission, and takes a picture of some breasts, I can sue them for an outrageous sum of money?

Dumb people. Dumb, dumb, dumb.


Photo Comments
,
10 years 2 months ago #347721 by Eliffman
:agree: I going to agree with Gary on this one, this is absurd waste of legal resources


Photo Comments
,
10 years 2 months ago #347961 by icepics
I don't think he was charged with a crime. I found a couple of other articles about this and apparently he discovered that there isn't a law specific to this; he wasn't just taking one impromptu photo - I saw more than one (see the Village Voice blog), and he apparently has done this same type thing elsewhere with the same model.

He seems to have been posting these photos a lot of places online which to me seems as if that could have been purposeful in being attempts to gain public attention; not sure whether that would show that he was doing this with an intent to promote and benefit his business or not.

I think the amount was based on him being a professional fashion photographer who does commercial work; even if he didn't license usage of these photos directly he seems to have used their private property to shoot photos that may have been used to help promote his business.

This is why it's beneficial for a photographer to get a property release signed. You can't assume you can use someone else's property to conduct your business or make money.

Sharon
Photo Comments
,
10 years 2 months ago #347989 by Sawyer
So are you saying if this was just a normal Joe who took the photo and posted on his Facebook page, that hey wouldn't have been pursued? 

Canon 5D Mark II | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM | Canon 35L | Sigma 85 1.4 | Helios 44M-6 58mm(M42) | Zeiss 50mm 1.4 (C/Y) | Canon 135L | (2) 430EX II
Photo Comments
,
10 years 2 months ago #348007 by Stealthy Ninja
Just looked the guy up and icepics is right, he likes to shoot models (topless or in their underwear) in public places.

IMHO he's crossed the line to voyeuristic/exhibitionist porn.
,
10 years 2 months ago #348039 by KCook

garyrhook wrote:

TCooper wrote: Doesn't the Empire State Building make enough from tourist as it is?


Not at all sure how that's relevant.

What makes no sense is that it was private property. So, if someone comes into my yard without my permission, and takes a picture of some breasts, I can sue them for an outrageous sum of money?

Dumb people. Dumb, dumb, dumb.


Yup, in fact you CAN sue them.  However, no particular result is guaranteed.  Funny thing, civil court.

Kelly

Canon 50D, Olympus PL2
kellycook.zenfolio.com/

,

817.3K

241K

  • Facebook

    817,251 / Likes

  • Twitter

    241,000 / Followers

  • Google+

    1,620,816 / Followers

Latest Reviews

The Olympus Pen E-P7 is an affordable micro four thirds mirrorless camera with 4K video capabilities, a 20.3MP sensor, and 121 focus points, making it a solid entry-level camera for beginners.

May 13, 2024

The Panasonic G9 II is a 25.2-megapixel micro four thirds camera with numerous features that make it punch out of its weight class, like 779 AF points, 5.8K video, and weather sealing.

May 10, 2024

The Fujifilm XT5 is a 40MP mirrorless camera capable of 6.2K video at 30p. With those specs, it’s an ideal choice for photographers needing a camera to pull double duty for imaging and video.

Apr 25, 2024

The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!

Apr 22, 2024

Forum Top Posters

Latest Articles

The best photography jobs right now are a mix of tried-and-true gigs like wedding photography and new jobs highlighting AI’s capabilities, travel, and videography.

May 15, 2024

The Olympus Pen E-P7 is an affordable micro four thirds mirrorless camera with 4K video capabilities, a 20.3MP sensor, and 121 focus points, making it a solid entry-level camera for beginners.

May 13, 2024

Starting a photography business is one thing; sustaining your business over a long period of time is another. Use the tips in this professional photography guide to build something with longevity!

May 13, 2024

The Panasonic G9 II is a 25.2-megapixel micro four thirds camera with numerous features that make it punch out of its weight class, like 779 AF points, 5.8K video, and weather sealing.

May 10, 2024

Cinematic photography is an interesting genre that combines photographic and videographic skills along with effective storytelling techniques. The result? Highly impactful images!

May 09, 2024

Newborn photography requires skill, the right gear, and a lot of patience. This beginner’s guide discusses critical topics that will help you be more prepared for before, during, and after the shoot.

May 08, 2024

To fill the frame means to expand the footprint of the subject in your shot. Get in close, zoom in, crop the image, or use other techniques to bring the subject to the forefront.

May 06, 2024

With these simple yet effective beginner photography tips, you can avoid some of the common mistakes beginners make and get improved results with your images.

May 06, 2024