Lady Gaga Declares War on Concert Photographers

Borderfox

http://www.ology.com/music/lady-gaga-declares-war-concert-photographers

"Has Lady Gaga finally gone too far? (Need we even ask?) First she’s threatening to sue a London ice cream maker for naming his new flavor “Baby Gaga” (read all about that here) and now pop music’s favorite derivative princess is demanding that concert photographers sign over all copyright ownership to anything shot during one of her shows.
Seriously?
According to a new article in Rolling Stone by Matthew Perpetua (read it here), photographer Jay Westcott of the Washington, D.C.-based website TBD.com was issued a release form by Camp Gaga stating that any and all photographs of her taken during a Monsters Ball performance become instant creative property of Lady Gaga. While this type of thing isn’t completely unheard of (Beastie Boys and the Foo Fighters issue similar release forms, Perpetua points out), it’s worth noting that there is a second release form that doesn’t force photographers to sign over rights to their work, intended for larger publications and websites with more clout. According to photographer and intellectual property lawyer David Atlas, “Typically the person who has the least leverage gets the worst release… Maybe there's a photographer that she likes who won't have to sign the release form, but the people who get paid $125 to hang out for four hours at a concert have to sign this release. So on top of getting paid very little, they have no ongoing revenue stream from these photos whatsoever.”
Hard working, usually under-compensated concert photographers are right to be pissed off that artists like Lady Gaga seem to have little respect for what they actually do. To be fair, who would even know or care about Stefani Germanotta without the ocean of photographs that built up her creative reputation? Crouched down below the stage, these artists are doing nothing else if not helping to promote and advance the bands and performers they’re photographing. Their work needs to be protected and respected just as much as the music coming out of the amplifiers.
Has Lady Gaga gone too far with all these control freak antics? Hit up our comments section with your thoughts."

Thecageyone

Just another case of a 'star' getting too big for their boots. What next? Banning mobile phones from her gigs? So nobody can upload crap quality videos of her equally crap performances?

Strangerthings

Its a shame that Gaga, who started off as a but of an "underdog" now has such a huge ego. For someone who says she respects all types of creativity sure is trying to squash many other peoples ideas.

She has gone from being a credible artist who was quirky to someone who uses the shock factor to garner publicity for mediocre pop songs...

smelltheglove

One thing is for sure, if I was handed one of those forms I would walk away and I would hope that most others would too,even if I was in desperate circumstances for the $125:mad:

magicbastarder

Strangerthings wrote: »

She has gone from being a credible artist

http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-its-time-to-stop-paying-attention-to-lady-gaga/

Placebo

isnt she sponsoring the new polaroid and the cool sunglasses cameras?
no one watch the release? pretty interesting products

condra

lady poo poo

swingking

Well worth watching the whole thing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIpM0GCljfQ

Thecageyone

Ah yes, the Chinese Jeremy Clarkson.

STG is right, photographers should respond to her nonsense by never showing up. See how far she gets when she's not plastered across every other newspaper. Easily forgotten, out of sight and all that.

Lady c**tga if we're brutally honest.

mehfesto

Thecageyone wrote: »

photographers should respond to her nonsense by never showing up. See how far she gets when she's not plastered across every other newspaper. Easily forgotten, out of sight and all that.

Never gonna happen though.
The paps need her as much - she's one one women's rag-mag a week at least. She is the biggest pop music artist since Britney when she broke onto the scene. Ignoring her isn't an option. Thinking she's a bell-end is.

Realistically too, no professional photographer is gonna turn down a nights payment on the offchance she uses their image on posters etc. Sad fact, but she holds all the cards here.

pixbyjohn

Gagarama by pixbyjohn, on Flickr

NakedDex

I'd put a hefty bet that the decision to do so had very little to do with her, and far more to do with a management team trying to control yet more of her image and public exposure. If half of her fame, or more, can be attributed soley to how she looks, it stands to reason that her managers and associated staff would want as much control over that commodity as possible.
It's not pleasant from a photographers standpoint, but it makes sense for them.

CabanSail

Never heard of her.

Would not recognise her if I tripped over her in the gutter she kicked me while having a substance induced public nap.

The only way to stand up to these legends in a lunchtime is to ignore them.

NakedDex

My girlfriend is an avid Lady Gaga fan, to the point where you'd honestly think she was the second coming of Christ the way she speaks about her. When I brought up this situation in conversation, I was basically told that she's absolutely right and "why should anyone else be making money from her style and talents?".
I'm already in the dog house for having even brought it up, so I'm not pressing the matter any further with the application of reason or logic. Or copyright law...


I've come to discover, through herself, that Lady Gaga has gathered a following which would be well into the cult status enjoyed by things like the Rocky Horror, were she not so mainstream. We can ignore her, but that won't matter a damn. There's a veritable legion of zealous fans who look upon her almost like a religion. Basically, she currently has the power to do whatever the hell she wants.

homerun_homer

I've no doubt she has a hand in this but seeing the Foo Fighters mentioned I should note that their manager or PR person who deals with this side of things took it upon herself to create terrible, dictator like contracts to photogs shooting their shows. She is supposed to be a horrible person and a nightmare to deal with, giving her an awful relationship with many a professional photographer.

Dave Grohl and co are stand up chaps who I honestly doubt would be so controlling with this aspect of their career. Sometimes it's the people behind the band who take the biscuit.

Thecageyone

I was surprised to see the Foo's named back there alright; Grohl is apparently one of the nicer guys in Rock.

I read a great story a few years ago, the time they were headlining Oxygen - He was caught short on the way to the venue and needed the little boy's room. They knocked on a random door and, fter being allowed to use the bathroom, he sat with the house owner's daughter [who was a fan, and obviously shocked and mesmerised by this random occurrence], tuned her guitar by ear and showed her how to play the chorus to one of the Foo's songs. Sound.

happyoutscan

Just ignore her and she'll go away (if only....).

Effects

swingking wrote: »

Well worth watching the whole thing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIpM0GCljfQ

No it's not. That's ****ing terrible.