Judge Batts, who ruled in favor of photographer Patrick Cariou in his case against Richard Prince, has just ruled in favor of photographer William Eggleston in his case. Read about it here. Mr. Eggleston was sued by a collector, Jonathan Sobel, who objected to the release of a new edition of Eggleston’s work done digitally by inkjet, claiming it reduced the value of Eggleston’s dye transfer work. Judge Batts dismissed the case and once again and wins one “for the Gipper”, if the Gipper is used to represent all photographers. In any case, YAY FOR US!
Subscription Options: Follow us on Facebook!
#1 by Soothsayer Jones on April 25, 2013 - 4:01 pm
“Judge Batts, who ruled in favor of photographer Patrick Cariou in his case against Richard Prince,”
Batts was reversed on appeal. The case is, all things now considered, a win for “appropriation artists” and a loss for photographers.
#2 by Jack and Ed on April 25, 2013 - 7:28 pm
Sorry, but you are not correct. This can serve as an illustration as to why the Internet can be a collection of good information misinterpreted and/or simply a bucket of misinformation.
The Second Circuit (The Appeals Court) heard oral arguments from the attorneys. The judges (as is utterly typical) asked questions, made statements and commented to the lawyers for any number of reasons in an effort to make sure they understood all of the attorneys’ arguments. Such questions, comments etc. may or may not mean anything when this court renders its written decision.
For a perfect example on how relying on such oral arguments can be an awful predictor of how a court will eventually rule, see the US Supreme Court’s oral argument sessions regarding “ObamaCare”. The vast number of “knowing” journalists who cover the SCOTUS (and probably most lawyers) who were naive’ enough to predict a decision based on the oral arguments, confidently predicted that “ObamaCare” was essentially D O A. The written decision – the only thing that counts – was not reflective of the oral arguments or the comments made by the judges. Most of the talking heads were wrong but unlike in baseball, the fans don’t keep any stats on “pundit accuracy”.
We have frequently remarked at our seminars on the sweeping effect of Judge Batts’ injunction against sales of these works by purchasers. Ed made it clear that he had never seen a comparable directive from any other judge in a copyright case. This court can uphold all or portions of the original decision, reverse all or parts of it or can send all or part of the case back to the trial court for a new trial on one or more issues.
Bottom line – the appellate decision has not as yet been rendered and as of now nothing has changed. The decision will most likely come down within 60 days or so. But as any litigator will tell you, mileage may vary.