Is Printing Call Girl Photos Fair Use?
from the transformative-use dept
Last week, Mike noted the controversy over whether printing racy photos of Ashley Alexandra Dupre, the prostitute at the center of the Eliot Spitzer scandal, was fair use. He thought it was, and William Patry has an interesting post exploring one precedent that might support a fair use finding. He describes a 2000 case in which a Puerto Rican model's nude photographs were the subject of a copyright dispute. The model had been crowned Miss Puerto Rico Universe 1997, and some people thought that she had set a bad example by posing nude. Newspapers began printing the photos as part of their coverage of the dispute, and the holder of the copyright in that case sued the newspaper for copyright infringement. The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled in 2000 that the use of the photos were fair use because the photos were integral to the scandal the newspaper was reporting on, and that the use was "transformative" because the news-reporting function the newspaper was making of the photos was significantly different than the portfolio-building purposes for which the photos were originally taken. Patry suggests that similar reasoning might apply in this case. However, one of Patry's commenters points out an important consideration on the other side: in the Puerto Rico case, the photographs were at the center of the scandal. Pictures of Ms. Dupre are not central to the Eliot Spitzer scandal in a way that's remotely analogous. So it might be harder to make a fair use argument in this case. The key question, I think, is whether the judge felt that the photos were integral to the reporting of the story, or whether the story was just an excuse to increase circulation by printing some racy photos. That seems like a close call to me.
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, copyright, eliot spitzer, fair use, news reporting
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
reply
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: reply
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: reply
Frankly, I'm interested to see where this goes. I think the newspapers would have an easy time arguing fair use if each only published one or two photos as a supplement to the story. On several news sites, however, I saw they had a photo-gallery of Ms. Dupre. To me, this did not seem to be an important part of the story. I'm much more hesitant to call the photo-galleries of ripped images 'Fair Use'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: reply
Perhaps Mr. "Spit"zer has some interesting needs.... or has to pay for someone to be accepting of him....
For a grand an hour - they should lube his CAR too!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Though, if anyone brings a lawsuit, the pics *will* be at the center of the case and then everyone could print them as they wished so long as they were covering the case. This definitely makes the outcome either win-win or lose-lose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paying for it
More power to her. If the newspapers want to make money peddling her flesh to all the closet voyeurs out there then she should get a cut.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Into the Public Domain
I will agree, that one would not have the right to put her image on a poster and to sell the poster without her consent.
Of course I am NOT a lawyer and this approach may not comply with how the law is interpreted today. Its time for the law to recognize that if content is being tossed out by the content creator for easy public consumption that this would constitute a "gift" to the public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Close call?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Close call?
No kidding. I like the picture of her in the bikini on the boat - great rack.
As she explores commercial opportunities, maybe one of the condom manufacturers would hire her as a spokesmodel: "If I can make the Governor wear a [insert condom product name here] you can make your dirt bag boyfriend wear one. Just say, do you want the sex or not ..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Infringement... yes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
heloo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]