Photographer Sues Rihanna Saying Her Video Violates Copyright On His Photos
from the an-homage-is-infringing? dept
This is bizarre. Shocklee points us to the news that celebrity photographer David LaChapelle is suing singer Rihanna, claiming that the video of her latest song, “S&M” is “directly derived” from his photographs. I haven’t seen the full lawsuit filing (anyone got it?), so I don’t know all of the details of what’s being alleged, but the derivative claims sound like a standard copyright claim. A few news sources have compared the video and the photos, and while they’re similar and the photos certainly may have inspired the scenes in the video, they certainly don’t look like direct copies in any way. Here are a few examples, video on the left, photos on the right.
Filed Under: copyright, david lachapelle, rihanna, video
Comments on “Photographer Sues Rihanna Saying Her Video Violates Copyright On His Photos”
Ooo ick! You put perez hilton on your blog.
Re: Re:
You got blog on Perez Hilton!
Re: Re: Re:
Now you have me picturing Perez and Masnick in a big bucket of peanut butter. Not a pretty though.
Re: Re:
wonder if his blog got an std.
Re: Re: Re:
“wonder if his blog got an std.”
Is Perez notoriously promiscuous or something?
Is someone feeling inadequat?
Looks like David LaChapelle is feeling a little fame envy. The stuff in the photographs looks like the standard S&M fare. No reason why he should feel miffed. Does he expect me to pay him royalties every time I spank my girlfriend?
Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
Good work if you can get it.
Re: Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
What spanking his girlfriend, or the royalties piece? 😉
Re: Re: Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
Hrm. Have to think about that one.
Re: Re: Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
Hrm. Have to think about that one.
Re: Re: Re:2 Is someone feeling inadequat?
Twice?
Re: Re: Re:3 Is someone feeling inadequat?
Three times a lady?
Re: Re: Re:4 Is someone feeling inadequat?
Hey, it’s that important.
Re: Re: Re:5 Is someone feeling inadequat?
I love this blog.
Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
ffffff… I’m copyright violating every other Tuesday and never knew it!
Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
Pickle Monger: putting the “violating” in violating copyright 😀
Re: Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
Which leads me to believe that there should be a lesser charge than copyright violation. Copyright molestation anyone?
Re: Re: Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
If we’re going that route, then there should totally be “Copyright Harassment” too.
Re: Re: Re:2 Is someone feeling inadequat?
non-consensual copyright copulation.
Re: Re: Re:3 Is someone feeling inadequat?
With a special one in Sweden for “consensual-on-condition-of-condom-but-eventually-without-the-condom-so-now-it’s-rape” copulation
Re: Re: Re:2 Is someone feeling inadequat?
There sort of is. It’s called strategic lawsuit against public participation or SLAPP for short.
Re: Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
“Does he expect me to pay him royalties every time I spank my girlfriend?”
Pics or it didn’t happen….
Re: Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
Hmmm… Maybe I’ll take some with a big giant helmet on my head… Better yet, I’ll get my girlfriend to wear it!
Re: Re: Re: Is someone feeling inadequat?
“Hmmm… Maybe I’ll take some with a big giant helmet on my head… Better yet, I’ll get my girlfriend to wear it!”
Well….that’s just creepy….
Re: Re: Re:2 Is someone feeling inadequat?
Unlike, say, a leash and a ball gag…
Totally unrelated, but does anyone knows if in the video is someone dialing a phone number by any chance?
Hola Susana te estamos decodificando – Hello Susana we are decoding you
Just for the curious.
The decoding mentioned is about how to extract phone numbers from video that has someone dial it and you can hear it.
a leather mistress leading a guy around on a leash…..yeah, thats unique.
I can sympathize with the photog a bit in this case. My buddy is a vis artist (fine art) and his ideas keep showing up in movies. He knows htat it is not really actionable but I can see why it bugs him.
Re: Re:
Wouldn’t this be good for your friend? He can now pitch his work to studios by saying “Look. These were my ideas. I’m happy you used them and this proves my ideas are good. Let’s see what I can create specifically for you instead of someone else recycling my old stuff.”
I don’t feel sympathy for David LaChapelle, many people believe they are original when what they did was guided by their times and environment that lead them to a certain conclusion.
University of Washington: Building Rome in a Day
The program above collect millions of picture from Flickr to reconstruct Rome in one day in 3D, if we asked the program to come up with the images that have close resemblance I’m sure that there will not be a hundred, but thousands of images related to any one of those pictures.
Maybe that is the way to solve derivative works now ask a computer system to identify all images that are similar and sue everyone LoL
Or maybe we realize that we are not that original and shouldn’t be going legal for those things.
The walking a guy on a leash “hurrr durrr look how empowered and also kinky I am” thing is completely uncreative, and was even when Madonna did it before either of you.
Re: Re:
I think the prior art goes back a bit longer than Madonna… but that would be a good high profile example.
double standard?
Here’s work by David LaChapelle that pays (exceedingly close) homage to Andy Warhol.
http://www.phillipsdepury.com/auctions/lot-detail.aspx?sn=UK010211&search=&p=15&order=&lotnum=370
Ironically, the ‘original’ (i.e. Warhol’s painting) is – itself – derived from yet another photograph. So by the time LaChapelle took a photo that was composed and processed to look like a painting that was itself an image of an image, the whole “derivative work” thing had taken on several layers. Indeed, they are both derivative works ABOUT derivative works.
In fairness to LaChapelle, he explicitly credits his source in Warhol. But did he get advance permission from the Warhol estate and pay whatever they would likely charge for this? I have no idea, but if LaChapelle is going to get into a fight like the one he’s in, now would be a great time for him to say which side of this issues he’s been on in the past.
Does anyone else know if his “Amanda Lepore as Andy Warhol’s Marilyn (Red)” was done with the permission and payment? Or did he just do it because he wanted to, offering nothing more that the credit that *he* felt was due, and nothing more?
UPDATED this page for ya, Mike, with a bit of actuality:
by Mike Masnick Fri, Oct 21st 2011 2:18pm
Homage Is Expensive: Rihanna Pays Up To Settle Photographer’s Lawsuit
We’ve been covering the lawsuit filed by photographer Dave LaChapelle because the video for Rihanna’s song S&M appeared to mimic some of the ideas found in some of his photographs:
Of course, we thought that there was an idea/expression dichotomy in copyright law that says you can’t copyright the idea — just the expression. So we thought that a judge would make quick work of the case. Instead, the judge confirmed what we already suspected: the idea/expression dichotomy is a total and complete myth, and the case could move forward. This was reasonably troubling for lots of folks — though certainly for Rihanna.
So it came as little surprise that Rihanna has “settled” the lawsuit with LaChapelle, meaning that she gave him a bunch of cash to go away. The lesson in all of this? Homage is expensive. You’re best off not bothering.
Blatant Copyright!
Thats blatant copyright in my eyes..Rhianna also knew this!