{"id":1409,"date":"2015-04-10T18:04:26","date_gmt":"2015-04-10T22:04:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/?p=1409"},"modified":"2015-04-10T18:04:26","modified_gmt":"2015-04-10T22:04:26","slug":"svenson-ii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/?p=1409","title":{"rendered":"Svenson II"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>As we predicted, the NY appellate court has upheld the decision of the lower court in dismissing the claims of persons who were photographed without giving their written consent.\u00a0 See our original piece: <a href=\"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/?p=1085\"><em>One Size Does Not Fit All<\/em><\/a> , for the basic facts.<\/p>\n<p>In this <em>New York<\/em> case, brought under the <em>New York<\/em> Civil Rights Law Section 51, the appeals court (correctly in our opinion) held that &#8220;&#8230; works of art fall outside of the prohibitions of the privacy statute under the newsworthy and public concerns exemption&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>Essentially the court has held that notwithstanding:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>\u00a0lack of consent by the subjects:\u00a0<em>and<\/em><\/li>\n<li>\u00a0that some of the subjects were children, some in various states of undress; <em>and<\/em><\/li>\n<li>\u00a0the photos were shot surreptitiously from long distances; <em>and<\/em><\/li>\n<li>\u00a0the subjects were in their own homes\/apartments<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The thrust of the decision is that the court found that NY law exempted Mr. Svenson &#8211; fine art photographer- from the requirement of securing model releases for the images that were sold as &#8220;fine art&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>We again caution each and every one of you out there that this case is specific to New York and it&#8217;s state law.\u00a0 Assuming identical facts but a different venue ie Alabama, Texas, etc. there would very likely have been a different result.\u00a0 Additionally, whether any such images created would rise to the legal level of &#8220;child pornography&#8221; and thus exposing the photographer to potential civil and\/or criminal penalties \u00a0is typically determined by state law.<\/p>\n<p>Note also that the appellate court specifically stated that &#8220;&#8230;news gathering methods may be tortious&#8221;.\u00a0 In English, certain techniques or practices can still get one sued.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, this court in effect ruled that the images themselves were not somehow &#8220;so outrageous&#8221; as to lose 1st Amendment or NY Civil Rights law protection<\/p>\n<p>A copy of the entire decision is here and we urge you to read it: <a href=\"http:\/\/law.justia.com\/cases\/new-york\/appellate-division-first-department\/2015\/651826-13-12998.html\">http:\/\/law.justia.com\/cases\/new-york\/appellate-division-first-department\/2015\/651826-13-12998.html<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>As we predicted, the NY appellate court has upheld the decision of the lower court in dismissing the claims of persons who were photographed without giving their written consent.\u00a0 See our original piece: One Size Does Not Fit All , for the basic facts. In this New York case, brought under the New York Civil [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[151,374,100,15,4],"tags":[187,208],"class_list":["post-1409","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-be-aware","category-fine-art","category-in-the-news","category-legal","category-releases","tag-appellate-court","tag-arne-svenson"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1409","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1409"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1409\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1410,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1409\/revisions\/1410"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1409"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1409"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1409"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}