Posts Tagged ‘photography’

Copyright suit over sharing of “wrong on so many levels” meme

A popular meme went around social media with a photo of an assortment of carpenter’s levels each with the word “wrong” taped on it, and typically accompanied by the comment “This is wrong on so many levels.”

Among the many that shared this was a family-owned small business in North Carolina that develops curricular materials on grammar and other language arts, and has a large following for its Facebook page. More than a year and a half later a lawsuit arrived from “on behalf of Matthew Bradley of Windsor, California, who says he created the meme. There had previously been no communication between Bradley and AG. Representing Bradley is New York attorney Richard Liebowitz.” The case has been in litigation since, expensively to AG’s owner, and is now entering court-mandated mediation. [Dan Booth Law; Analytical Grammar legal defense GoFundMe, active lately; earlier on lawyer Liebowitz here and here]

Filed under: copyright, Facebook, photography

Arresting bystanders for taking photographs of emergencies

A reminder that if police try to invoke HIPAA, the health privacy law, to keep you from photographing a medical or police incident in a public place, they are almost sure to be talking through their hat. That isn’t how HIPAA works [Tim Cushing, Techdirt, Dallas transit case; earlier on Denver case]

Filed under: Dallas, HIPAA, photography, police

Free speech roundup

Massachusetts state lawmaker who introduced much-derided bill to criminalize the word “bitch” when directed at another person says he “filed the bill after being asked to do so by a constituent.” [Alex Griswold, Free Beacon]
Presidents have long used their power to retaliate against the press. When does the constitution direct or permit the courts to do anything about that? [First Amendment lawyer Robert Corn-Revere for FIRE, part one and part two]
After two students shout racial slur loud enough for others to hear, University of Connecticut arrests and charges them “under a rarely-used, unconstitutional state law prohibiting ‘ridicule.'” [Adam Steinbaugh, FIRE]
“May a company get an injunction to block a defendant from invoking the Streisand Effect?” [Paul Alan Levy]
How courts draw the line on when menacing language triggers the “true threat” exception to First Amendment protection [Federalist Society teleforum with Eugene Volokh, John Elwood, and Michael Dreeben]
“Should Congress Pass A ‘Deep Fakes’ Law? A few tentative thoughts.” [Orin Kerr, Volokh Conspiracy]

Filed under: Connecticut, First Amendment, free speech, hate speech, Massachusetts, photography

May 22 roundup

My comment on the House-passed H.R. 5: “Proposed Equality Act would 1) massively expand federal liability in areas unrelated to sex, gender, or orientation; 2) turn 1000s of routine customer gripes into federal public-accommodations cases; 3) squeeze conscience exemptions hard. All are good reasons to oppose.” More: Scott Shackford, Elizabeth Nolan Brown, Hans Bader, and earlier here and here;
America is not in a constitutional crisis: “Politicians have become incentivized to declare constitutional crises because it enhances their own importance as saviors and demonizes their opponents as illegitimate.” [Keith Whittington; Vox mini-symposium with Ilya Somin and others] Mike McConnell vs. Josh Chafetz on whether the current Congressional subpoena fights are really that different from politics of the past [Jonathan Adler] Calm, down-the-middle analysis of the issues raised by the Mueller report [Cato Institute chairman Bob Levy]
“Mercedes Goes To Court To Get Background Use Of Public Murals In Promotional Pics Deemed Fair Use” [Timothy Geigner]
Bizarro sovereign-citizen notions are found in the background of more than a few serious financial fraud cases [Ashley Powers, New York Times]
Divestment and sanctions by state governments aimed at other U.S. states is a bad idea that never seems to go away. Now it’s being floated in Maryland, against Alabama [my Free State Notes post]
“A federal judge in Texas wants you to know she’s sick and tired of whiny lawyers” [Justin Rohrlich, Quartz from December, Brad Heath on Twitter; Align Technology v. ClearCorrect, Judge Vanessa D. Gilmore]

Filed under: Alabama, art and artists, constitutional law, folk law, Maryland, photography, sexual orientation, transgender

Harvard sued over slave daguerreotypes

Meritless lawsuits should not be welcome in our legal system: a woman who says she is descended from a slave photographed on the 1850 orders of scientist Louis Agassiz is suing Harvard for recovery of the early photo and for unspecified damages. [Joey Garrison, USA Today]

Filed under: Harvard, photography, reparations, statutes of limitations

A ban on airbrushing?

Jameela Jamil (“The Good Place”) wants to ban airbrushing in magazines and advertisements, warning BBC readers that, “If you buy the products airbrushing is used to advertise, you won’t look like the person in the photograph.”

“If this comes as a surprise to you, please exercise caution before stepping out of doors or in front of a mirror,” I reply in my new op-ed in southern California newspapers. “Here in the land of liberty, fortunately, we recognize that to ban display of someone’s airbrushed image even if they’re fine with the idea would constitute a trifecta of coercion, stomping on personal autonomy, freedom to contract with others, and freedom of the press.” Read it here.

P.S. Review of General Psychology paper on media and body image here, and related.

Filed under: advertising, celebrities, photography, publishers, WO writings

Creator royalties on art in public spaces

Creators of art displayed in parks and other public spaces have been using assertions of copyright to demand cash from, or play favorites among, private persons and groups seeking to carry on video or photography in those spaces. Aaron Renn: “Any city installing public art should ensure that the agreement with the artist provides for unconditional royalty free pictures and videos, or the art shouldn’t be installed.”

Filed under: art and artists, copyright, photography, roads and streets

New York bill would ban many instances of photo-sharing as elder abuse

What?! A bill passed 61-0 in the New York senate, and promoted as curbing elder abuse, “makes it a crime for caregivers (including family) to post photos on social media if elderly, vulnerable seniors aren’t able to give consent.” [Eric Turkewitz]

Filed under: First Amendment, New York, photography

September 13 roundup

Scranton, Pa. federal judge “denies ‘exorbitant’ request for nearly $1M in attorney fees after $125K recovery” [ABA Journal; arose from bad faith insurance action on underlying uninsured motorist claim that settled for $25,000]
As PETA settles monkey selfie case with hapless photographer, details confirm that “Naruto is really just a prop to be deployed in the case as PETA sees fit.” [Ted Folkman, Eriq Gardner, earlier] A sad catalogue of litigation abuse enabled by PETA’s donors [Frank Bednarz thread]
Lively First Circuit opinion upholds extortion conviction of small town police chief [Bob Dunn, Berkshire Eagle, U.S. v. Buffis via IJ’s John Ross, “Short Circuit“; Lee, Mass.]
She beat DOMA and the IRS too, and all in great style. My appreciation of Edith Windsor [Cato at Liberty]
“North Carolina’s Fickle Finger of Redistricting” [also by me at Cato at Liberty]
Me: “Posner was the judge lawyers really didn’t want to run into if they had bad class action settlements to defend” [Jonathan Bilyk, Cook County Record, earlier]

Filed under: animal rights, class action settlements, feeing frenzy, First Circuit, North Carolina, photography, redistricting reform, Richard Posner, sexual orientation, WO writings

Monkey-selfie photographer sued by PETA says he’s broke

PETA has appealed to the Ninth Circuit the dismissal of its suit, ostensibly on behalf of a wild monkey, against “monkey-selfie” photographer David Slater. Slater, reduced by years of litigation against the fanatical animal rights group and other parties, is in financial straits and thinking of walking dogs to earn money. “Nor can he afford to replace his broken camera equipment, or pay the attorney who has been defending him since the crested black macaque sued him in 2015, and is exploring other ways to earn an income.” Abusive litigation is evil and don’t even ask what I think of PETA. [The Guardian]

Filed under: animal rights, photography