Legal Nightmare

Posted on 12/22/2003 by Jim Pickerell | Printable Version | Comments (0)

602

LEGAL NIGHTMARE



December 22, 2003

If you think that owning copyright to your images guarantees you the right to
stipulate how those images will be used, and to receive compensation for each use;
THINK AGAIN -- particularly if you are dealing with the U.S. legal system.


Back to the Spring of 1997 National Geographic Society (NGS) first announced that
they were going to publish a CD-ROM set that contained all the pictures and words
that had appeared in its flagship magazine for the previous 108 years. Most
photographers believed they should receive some additional compensation for this
re-use of their imagery in an entirely new product. National Geographic initially
claimed that they had a right to use all of the images without any additional
compensation whatsoever. Then they made an offer to a few people of $20 per image for
unlimited rights to use the images on CD-ROM products forever. When that offer was
rejected by virtually everyone NGS reverted to their initial position that based on
section 201(c) of the U.S. Copyright Act they had the right to use these images and
they weren't going to pay anyone anything.


The Battle Was Joined


Some photographers thought at the time, "what's the big deal?" Each image is one of
almost 150,000 that are on each CD set and who will want to buy CD's anyway. What can
a single image be worth? Well, in the intervening years the initial CD-ROM project
morphed into more that 100 different products, all re-using images that were first
published in National Geographic Magazine. These products have generated more than
$70 million in total revenue. Someone's making money off these products, but it's not
the content producers.


The vast majority of photographers and photo agencies took the position that, "I
can't fight someone as big as NGS," and let them do whatever they wanted. There were
loud grumblings, but little else. However, a few photographers were prepared to join
the legal battle.


Greenberg vs. NGS


The first was Jerry Greenberg. He had all his images that were contained in four
major stories registered prior to the infringement. He had clear letters of agreement
with NGS stating that what he had licensed NGS was one-time-rights to use these
images and that the right to make any additional uses needed to be negotiated.


At first his case was heard in the U.S. Federal District Court in Miami. The judge in
that case granted NGS' motion for summary judgment and held that the "allegedly
infringing work was a revision of a prior collective work and fell within the
defendant's privilege under 201(c)" of the copyright law. The judge based her
decision on the Tasini vs. New York Times case that was tried in the Southern
District of New York and favored the Times. That case was at that time being appealed
to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and later to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme
Court eventually ruled in a 7-2 decision in favor of Tasini.


Greenberg appealed his case to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta which
eventually found in his favor and ordered U.S. District Judge Joan Lenard to enter a
judgment on the copyright claim in favor of Greenberg and to provide injunctive
relief.


NGS, aided by a brief written by former Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr, among
others, appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to review the 11th
Circuit opinion but the High Court without comments, refused to hear the case.


This meant that a new jury trial had to be held in Miami to determine what
"injunctive relief" (damages) should be.
This trial was held in March of 2003 (it had been six years since all this started)
and the jury found that the infringements had been "willful" and awarded Greenberg
$100,000 per infringement for four infringement ($400,000). Willful usually adds
legal fees to the damages.


Has Greenberg seen any money yet? No. Because NGS has asked Judge Lenard to set
aside the jury's determination and 9 months later she has yet to rule on that
request. NGS has indicated that if they don't like her decision they will appeal the
case back to the 11th Circuit.


Meanwhile


Fred Ward filed a case in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
and a group of photographers including Douglas Faulkner, David Hiser and Louis
Psihoyos also filed a separate case in that same court. These cases were assigned to
Judge Louis Kaplan, well known for handling major publishing cases that appear in
this jurisdiction.


Over the years Ward had more than 850 images and 12 articles published in National
Geographic Magazine. He also has excellent documentation substantiating that he
licensed specific one-time-rights to the material and that he was to be compensated
for additional uses. For more about his case see Story
475 .


In reviewing the case Judge Kaplan found that the new features contained in the first
Complete National Geographic set of CD-ROM's did not carry it over the line from
being a revision into a new work. He focused on the fact that NGS made no changes in
the content, format or appearance of the articles in the Magazine that were
reproduced in the CD's and rejected the finding of the 11 Circuit Court of Appeals.


On December 11, 2003, Judge Kaplan ruled that that NGS's section 201(c)(3) copyright
privilege allowed it to create the CD-ROM set. He argued that because the Supreme
Court ruling in New York Times v. Tasini was handed down several months after the
11th Circuit decision in the Greenberg case it cast doubt on the validity of the
Greenberg decision.


The implication of Judge Kaplan's decision are chilling. The court stated that so
long as the publisher digitally reproduces the contents of the original print work in
the same context in which they originally appeared, the publisher is free to add a
number of multimedia elements and software tools that enhance the marketability and
salability of the product.


Thus, unless Judge Kaplan's decision is overturned, we may find that publishers will
be allowed to display photographer's images in many new products without additional
permission, or compensation, so long as the context in which they first appeared
remains substantially the same. This could mean that an ad agency that wants to use
an ad on the web or a corporation that wants to offer their annual report, or
brochure as a PDF may be allowed to do so without having to pay creators for the
additional use.


The Battle Escalates Dramatically


Not only have the current plaintiffs spent countless hours in bringing the cases this
far, but they have also incurred huge expenses - and this may only be the beginning.
Now the case must be taken to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. In the Tasini
decision the 2nd Circuit overturned the District Court decision and found in favor of
Tasini. Whatever happens at the 2nd Circuit the losing side is likely to appeal to
the Supreme Court.


This is no longer a series of lawsuits brought by photographers and writers against
National Geographic for the CD sets. This is a major conflict between the creators of
intellectual property and those who would exploit their works.


The case hinges on what will become the legal definition of a "revision" as it
pertains to copyright law on the digital frontier. This legal hairsplitting could
have huge ramifications as to how clients will be able to use and distribute
photographer's work, and whether photographers will be entitled to compensation for
what they produce.


The plaintiffs are asking organizations and individuals who care about protecting the
copyright of artists, writers, photographers, musicians, painters, television and
movie producers, to file amicus (friend of the court) briefs on their behalf. It is
our understanding that ASMP and EP have already initiated work on such briefs.
(EP estimates that a single amicus brief will cost $8,000 to produce.)


Whatever the eventual resolution it is likely to be many years and many tens of
thousands of dollars in expenses in the future. Photographers considering an action
for copyright infringement should contemplate what might be involved, and carefully
weigh whether their pockets are deep enough to see the action through to the end.
It is unfortunate that the U.S. legal system isn't structured to better aid the
little guy, but that doesn't seem to be the case when it comes to defending
copyright.


Copyright © 2003 Jim Pickerell. The above article may not be copied, reproduced, excerpted or distributed in any manner without written permission from the author. All requests should be submitted to Selling Stock at 10319 Westlake Drive, Suite 162, Bethesda, MD 20817, phone 301-251-0720, e-mail: wvz@fpcubgbf.pbz

Jim Pickerell is founder of www.selling-stock.com, an online newsletter that publishes daily. He is also available for personal telephone consultations on pricing and other matters related to stock photography. He occasionally acts as an expert witness on matters related to stock photography. For his current curriculum vitae go to: http://www.jimpickerell.com/Curriculum-Vitae.aspx.  

Comments

Be the first to comment below.

Post Comment

You must log in to post comments.

Stay Connected

Sign up to receive our FREE weekly email listing new stories posted.

Follow Us

Free Stuff

Recent Stories – Summer 2016
If you’ve been shooting all summer and haven’t had time to keep up with your reading here are links to a few stories you might want to check out as we move into the fall. To begin, be sure to complet...
Read More
Corbis Acquisition by VCG/Getty Images
This story provides links to several stories that relate to the Visual China Group (VCG) acquisition of Corbis and the role Getty Images has been assigned in the transfer of Corbis assets to the Gett...
Read More
Finding The Right Image
Many think search will be solved with better Metadata. While metadata is important, there are limits to how far it can take the customer toward finding the right piece of content. This story provides...
Read More
Where Is The Stock Photo Industry Headed?
For new readers, or those who may have missed some of what I have written over the last few months, the following are a list of stories worth looking at to get a sense of where the industry is headed.
Read More
Photography As A Career
It’s that time of year when high school seniors are waiting for college acceptance letters and thinking about future careers. If you know someone who is thinking about photography as a career you mig...
Read More
2014 Stories You May Have Missed
For many the end of the year is a time to review past experiences and consider whether it makes sense to chart a new course in the year ahead. Stock photography has changed dramatically for professio...
Read More
More Stories In 2014 You May Have Missed
Every so often I put together a list of the most important stories we’ve published in the recent past. If you are engaged in the business of stock photography the links below are to stories that we’v...
Read More
Getty: A Three Month Review
In all the excitement about 35 million FREE images it is worth looking back at some of things that have been happening at Getty Images in the last three months. After watching revenue decline for the...
Read More
State Of Stock Photo Industry: 2013
If you’re looking for an overview of the state of the stock photo industry as of October 2013 the stories listed below are a good place to start. Regular readers of Selling-Stock will have seen all t...
Read More
Education Market Shifts To Digital
If supplying pictures for educational use is a significant part of your business plan you need to be aware of how the market is trending toward digital delivery and how that is likely to affect the p...
Read More

More from Free Stuff