Spitzer Call Girl Threatens News Outlets Over Copyright
from the it-all-comes-back-to-copyright dept
Well, it had to happen sooner or later. With the press going nuts printing photos of the call girl at the center of the Eliot Spitzer affair, her lawyers are suddenly making some noise about how using these photos violates her copyrights on them. Most of the photos were taken from her MySpace page, which ties back to a recent story here about how the press is trying to determine what's fair game in a social networking profile when the subject becomes newsworthy. While some think that a fair use claim by the newspapers is weak, US laws on copyright do allow a fair use defense in news reporting, which would seem to apply to the photos. They're certainly not printing these photos for their artistic value.The Associated Press, who has syndicated many of the photos in question has defended its use of the photos saying: "The Associated Press discussed the photos obtained from the MySpace page in great detail and found that they were newsworthy. We distributed the photos that were relevant to the story." Of course, as the What's Fair Use? blog points out, there's a bit of irony here. Just a few weeks ago, the AP used legal threats to get a photo-journalism criticism blog to stop using AP photos, claiming that it was copyright infringement. Apparently, the AP has different rules for itself than it has for others.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: ashley alexandra dupre, ashley youmans, call girl, copyright, eliot spitzer, photos
Companies: associated press
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
At the very least...
For too long have we all been reading about total crap copyright and patent issues that have received no coverage in the mainstream news outlets. Now maybe this will get enough attention that the archaic system in the US will finally be overhauled in a congressional / judicial action.
Yeah, I guess there is also a chance that Cindy Crawford will call me and ask me out...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Education for Ms. Ho's Lawyers
1: Once you decide to f--k a Governor for $5000 an hour, then you have made yourself into a public figure.
2: If you agree to become a witness in a criminal case in exchange for immunity from prosecution, you are now a public figure. Your name and photo, if the case is interesting enough, will show up in newspapers in the US and perhaps around the world.
3. She's worried about the unauthorized use of her photo, and yet she had no trouble taking off her clothes for pay? Maybe she should go to law school. What a loser.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Education for Ms. Ho's Lawyers
Yes, even public figures can hold a copyright on photos of themselves. In fact, if they were the one to take the picture, then they *do* hold the copyright on the photos.
So I think we should stick to the fair use argument, rather than getting sidetracked into whether or not she is a "public figure." That has no bearing on the copyright issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: making two grand an hour a loser?
Oops. Gotta go... my boss is calling...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But I think it's quite funny.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what do you mean "no artistic value"
on a serious note, she is now a public figure and i would think using her pictures would be 'fair use'
and i would give up the loser talk, that girl is now a millionaire.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: what do you mean "no artistic value"
Unfortunately that does not make one less of a loser, it simply gives them more friends who are willing to put up with their bullshit. Besides, most who come into money are broke(and in debt) in under 10 years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Two things - one is that people are so used to taking stuff from Flickr et al that they don't even consider copyright any more. That should be fine if you're a blogger or looking for a new desktop background, not so much if you're a large rich multinational media corporation using it in a commercial manner. And t'other is that fair use gets dodgy for pictures because at least with text, music, video etc. a small extract is possible. But what are you gojng do in this case, only show her left boob?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Little pro-tip about the internet, if it goes up, it gets out, and if it gets out, it never goes away.
Never had much sympathy for whiners when they had fair warning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So are most other publications. Following that logic then we should just get rid of copyright.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re: Spitzer Call Girl Threatens News Outlets Over
Is that not the case?
And what's more, I don't know about today, but at least 4 days after this story broke, I was able toaccess the young woman's mySpace page.
Seems as though perhaps her lawyers are looking for just another angle to work some cash.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: re: Spitzer Call Girl Threatens News Outlets O
Nope, commercial gain has NOTHING to do with fair use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: re: Spitzer Call Girl Threatens News Outlets O
Nope, commercial gain has NOTHING to do with fair use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nope, commercial gain has NOTHING to do with f
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Artisitc value
What then? For their educational value? It's a picture of a whore; not exactly photojournalism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
High Class?
This girl is cute, yes...but 4,300 dollars worth? No way.
Girls like this are a dime a dozen in any college bar.
As far as the photos go....fine, let her be a chud about it. Take unflattering photos of her and use those instead.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'scuse me jerky penmanship
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't care if it's a two dollar whore, copyright is copyright. They took them from her myspace, which is a place where she has put them up for her own use (advertising).
Honestly though, if I were her, I'd be thanking them for the "Streisand Effect" instead of complaining about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Streisand Effect"
"Streisand Effect"
"Streisand Effect"
"Streisand Effect"
"Streisand Effect"
"Streisand Effect"
Everyone DRINK! :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Like anymore attention could be paid to her?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oops, wrong forum. :-/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait for Playboy Pics
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
W-W-W-W-WHAT??
Even Monica had more character than this tramp and her mother.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And What About Her Music?
But was her "music" all original? If not, were copyrights posted?
Hilarious to think she may be throwing stones from her glass penthouse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
She has copyright wrong, here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. Get the IP addresses of all who viewed your photos.
2. Send a letter to the owners demanding $2999 (sorry, the $3k number is copyrighted by us the RIAA and may not be used in letters unless you license the term "$3000" from us).
3. Collect from the people who are your fans.
It works for us, it can work for you.
Brought to you as a public service announcement from the friendly folks at the RIAA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gary is right
The net net is that she has no case. There may be copyright violation if it can't pass the fair use test, but it's a violation of the photographer's copyright.
BTW, like most myspace users, what has really happened is that she has violated the copyright of the photographers and violated the Terms of Use on myspace.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yep, she's a loser
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
rtgt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]