[ad_1]
Gigi Hadid was successful in the lawsuit filed against her earlier this year for posting a photo of her on her Instagram account. According to the complaint filed in federal court in Brooklyn, New York, in January, Hadid "copied and posted" on his Instagram account a photo belonging to Xclsuive-Lee, Inc. "without authorization or authorization from Xclusive", inviting the agency of photo to file – and ultimately, lose – an action in violation of the right of author.
Following a lively exchange of views between the model's lawyer – who claimed that his use of the photo was not counterfeit but fair use (and that it was Hadid, not the photographer, who had provided the creative and copyrighted elements of the photo – and the paparazzi photographic agency – which challenged the allegedly "non-commercial" nature of Hadid's use of the photo and the "foolishness" From his co-sponsor complaint, including the fact that a federal court in Brooklyn, New York, gave Hadid the win on Thursday.
Citing the decision of the Supreme Court of March 2019 in Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. c. Wall-Street.com, LLCJudge Pamela Chen baderted that in order to plead a copyright infringement, the plaintiff had to possess a copyright registration. "The registration requirement is'[a] legal condition "under which an applicant must obtain the registration of an author's right on a work" before commencing legal action "on the basis of the violation of this "Judge Chen said.
The problem for Xclusive-Lee? It "does not claim that it has been officially granted the registration of a copyright in the photograph [of Hadid] Chen J. added: "At most, does the complaint allege, in fact, does the applicant appear to concede that, at the time she commenced the action, she had applied only for a copyright on the photo. "
Xclusive-Lee had previously argued that it should not be prohibited from pursuing its action for copyright infringement because of the Supreme Court's decision in Fourth domain – because he had started his case against Hadid, 23, nearly three months before the highest court in the country made his decision, "and because before the fourth trial, the second circuit had left" the rule of application / registration. . . question at the discretion of each district court judge ".
"There is no doctrinal foundation upon which this Court may refuse to apply a Supreme Court decision that would otherwise apply simply because that Supreme Court decision was rendered after the the complaint in question in this case, "says Judge Chen in her decision, and notes that Xclusive-Lee" does not cite any case law in support of her position ".
Although the filing of this case was in fact prior to the decision in the Fourth domain In this case, however, the decision of the Supreme Court is "binding on all lower federal courts until the Supreme Court decides to reconsider it," says Judge Chen, who later dismissed the case. .
Not quite the meaty decision we were hoping for (ie A decision that would address the claims of co-author and fair use that Hadid's lawyer made), especially account given the new understanding of the property of images in the digital age and the increasing number of paparazzi v. celebrities' copyright case, it's a decision, nonetheless.
* The case is the case XCLUSIVE-LEE, INC., V. JELENA NOURA "GIGI" HADID, 1: 19-cv-00520 (E.D.N.Y.).
Source link
