Photographer Kristina Hill has won a $2,501 judgment for copyright infringement against Public Advocate of the United States, ending a federal case in Colorado over unauthorized political attack ads. The judgment was entered June 4 in the US District Court in Denver.
Hill and her wedding photography clients, Brian Edwards and Thomas Privitere, sued Public Advocate of the United States in 2012 for unauthorized use of an engagement photo of Edwards and Privitere in political mailers produced in 2011 to defeat two Colorado lawmakers who supported same-sex marriage.
The mailers show images of Edwards and Privitere kissing each other. They were created from an engagement photo of the couple that the defendants found online and used without permission.
Hill alleged copyright infringement for unauthorized use of her photograph. Edwards and Priviter claimed misappropriation of their likeness for commercial purposes, in violation of their privacy and state right-of-publicity laws.
The court dismissed the couple’s misappropriation claim in March on the grounds that the ads were primarily non-commercial, and because they related to a matter of public concern. Therefore, free speech rights under the First Amendment shielded the defendants from the couple’s claim, the court said.
But the judge rejected Public Advocate’s motion to dismiss Hill’s copyright infringement claims on fair use grounds, because the ads didn’t pass the legal tests for fair use.
According to court papers, Public Advocate finally agreed to accept a declaration from the court that it had infringed Hill’s copyright, “without any finding or admission that such infringement was ‘willful'” under federal copyright statutes.
Public Advocate agreed to pay Hill $2,501 to cover costs related to her claim. The judgment agreement notes that Hill was not entitled to attorneys’ fees because she didn’t register her copyright in the disputed image before the infringement.
For the same reason, she was not entitled to statutory damages, but was limited to actual damages, which tend to be much lower than statutory damages.
Hill was not immediately available for comment.
Danny Clinch filed suit in federal court in New York June 2, alleging multiple copyright infringements of two of his photographs of late rap artist Tupac Shakur. The photographs were allegedly reprinted and distributed on T-shirts without permission. Clinch, a noted music photographer, names five defendants, including an agent for Shakur’s estate, two merchandise manufacturers,... More ›
Missoula, Montana-based photographer Erika Peterman is suing The Republican National Committee (RNC) for willful copyright infringement. The suit, filed in Montana District Court earlier this week, alleges the RNC used without permission a Peterman photograph of Rob Quist, the Democratic candidate in a special election to fill Montana’s seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.... More ›
A federal jury in Maryland has awarded $900,000 in actual damages to an Oregon-based plant retailer for its claims against a competitor over unauthorized use of two dozen copyrighted images. The jury verdict, delivered last week, also included a $300,000 statutory damages award, but the plaintiff may elect one jury award or the other (not... More ›