Carol Highsmith, the author of this image, received a demand letter from Getty to pay for using it on her own website. ©Carol M. HighsmithThree weeks after a federal judge gutted photographer Carol Highsmith’s $1 billion copyright claim against Getty Images, the two sides have ended their dispute with a settlement of the remaining claims. The terms of the settlement, over minor state law claims, were not disclosed.

US District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff dismissed all of Highsmith’s federal copyright claims—which were the foundation of her lawsuit—on October 28. He left three of Highsmith’s state law claims intact, and said he would issue a written explanation of the ruling “in due course.” Instead, he signed a terse  order of “voluntary dismissal” of the remaining claims on November 16, after Highsmith and Getty agreed to settle the case.

Highsmith filed suit in July, after discovering that Getty and its subsidiaries had been charging customers fees to license her images, without her consent. She alleged “gross misuse” and false attribution of 18,755 of her photographs of Americana. According to her claim, Getty and its subsidiaries were “falsely and fraudulently holding themselves out as the exclusive copyright owner” of her images. (An example of one of those images, distributed by Alamy, a Getty affiliate, is shown above).

Highsmith was claiming damages not for copyright infringement per se, but for violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Specifically, she charged Getty with violations of DMCA provisions that make it illegal to remove, modify or falsify copyright management information.

Getty countered that Highsmith’s images were in the public domain, and because she had donated the images to the Library of Congress and signed away her copyrights, she had no grounds for making her DMCA claims. (Highsmith donated her images to the Library of Congress in 1988).

Getty said it had done nothing illegal by offering copies of Highsmith’s image for license on its website. “Public domain works are routinely commercialized – e.g., publishers charge money for their copies of Dickens novels and Shakespeare plays, etc.,” the agency said in defending against Highsmith’s claims.

The court has said nothing about the merits of the arguments, but it was apparently persuaded by Getty’s argument to dismiss the federal claims. The state law claims that remained prior to the November 16 settlement were based upon New York state laws against “deceptive acts or practices” in the conduct of business.

Related:
Getty Says Photog Shut the Door on Her $1 Billion Claim


COMMENTS

MORE POSTS

Photographer Zwelethu Mthethwa Found Guilty of Murder

Posted by on Thursday March 16, 2017 | Copyright/Legal

A court in South Africa has convicted photographer Zwelethu Mthethwa of the 2013 murder of Nokuphila Kumalo, 23, a sex worker, in a suburb of Cape Town, several South African newspapers have reported. Bail for Mthethwa, a graduate of the Rochester Institute of Technology who is represented by Jack Shainman Gallery, was revoked while he... More

Jeff Koons Found Liable for Copyright Infringement. Again.

Posted by on Friday March 10, 2017 | Copyright/Legal

A French court has ordered appropriation artist Jeff Koons and contemporary art museum Centre Pompidou to pay €40,000 (about $46,000 US) for infringing the copyright of a photograph by the late French photographer Jean-François Bauret. The court decision was reported by Radio France Internationale (RFI). Bauret’s family sued Koons over a 1988 sculpture (shown at... More

Police Intimidation Watch: Mannie Garcia Gets $45,000 in Settlement with Maryland Police

Posted by on Thursday March 9, 2017 | Copyright/Legal

Photographer Mannie Garcia has won $45,000 to settle a claim against police in Montgomery County, Maryland for violation of his First Amendment rights in 2011. The claim stemmed from Garcia’s wrongful arrest for video recording and photographing the arrest of two other men outside a restaurant in Wheaton, Maryland. The settlement came just days before... More