• LandedGentry
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    He doesn’t have to post these exact photos and they gave him months to rectify the situation.

    The lawsuit alleges that Zlozower and his reps reached out to Ozzy about the photos multiple times last year, but never received a response. This, he says, forced him “to seek judicial intervention for defendant’s infringing activity.”

    You don’t get to purposely take someone else’s professional work and post it without permission. This is fundamental stuff. And it’s not like these photos magically appeared on his phone, they were taken and used without permission. At best they were sloppy and should’ve moved to remedy the situation.

    • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      This is the snake eating its tail.

      The photographer only took photos because he was famous. The photographer is getting money from someone else’s work.

      But the person you are profiting from cannot use the photographs because he is profiting from your work?

      I understand that legally, there is a set of laws to manage that. But ethically that is fucked up that the person you took a photo from didn’t give you permission and you profit from their notoriety, but that person cannot use the photos himself.

      • LandedGentry
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        21 minutes ago

        That is a ridiculously dishonest way of framing the issue.