using someones image?

Mike27

As far as I know using someones image without prior permission could potentionally lead to a legal dispute,but specifically does this also apply to public figures,in specific politicians?

For example if you put Enda Kennys image on a tshirt would that be "public domain" as such?

on_my_oe

Pele Power - Paddy Powers work cup promo theme - just got torn down from twenty branches

Meanwhile a popular t shirt in NZ features the Prime Minister John Key :rolleyes:

GerardKeating

Mike27 wrote: »

As far as I know using someones image without prior permission could potentionally lead to a legal dispute,but specifically does this also apply to public figures,in specific politicians?

For example if you put Enda Kennys image on a tshirt would that be "public domain" as such?

This might be two overlapping issues.

The person of whose image you use might have a case if the make a living from their "image" and the usage of it. Pele might be an example of that, Politicians less so.

The second issue would be the copyright owner in the image.

In your example of Enda Kenny, if (for example) you "borrowed" the picture from the Irish Times web site, both Enda and/or the Irish Times might sue you.

Mike27

Hmm,..seems like a bit of a minefield!

Pat Mustard

Check out Douglas v Hello.

Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones agreed a deal with OK! Magazine which would give the company exclusivity over their wedding which took place in 2000 at the Plaza Hotel in New York. According to the deal the couple were to approve the selection of photographs used by OK! Magazine. In order to ensure the exclusivity there was strict security of the event and no guests were allowed to take photographs, the event was closed to the media and guests were told to surrender any equipment which could be used to take photographs. However a freelance photographer Rupert Thorpe, son of the former British politician Jeremy Thorpe, managed to get into the wedding and take photographs of the couple. This photographer then sold the images to Hello magazine which had earlier attempted to bid for the photographs. The deal with OK! Magazine was worth £1,000,000.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_v_Hello!_Ltd

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/595.html

http://swarb.co.uk/douglas-and-others-v-hello-ltd-and-others-no-3-ca-18-may-2005/

I am unsure whether there is something more up to date than this.

Lingua Franca

Rihanna wins case against Topshop springs to mind.

Thoie

Does the fact whether it's for commerical use or not come into play?

For example, if I take a picture of you out and about in public, and put it on a t-shirt that I'm wearing (no, I don't know why I'd do that), that would be OK, as no-one is making money from it.

If I made up 100 t-shirts with a picture I took of you, and sold them, it would then count as commercial usage and I'd need your permission I believe.

So for your original question, it would depend on whether you took the picture of Enda while he was out in public, and whether or not you're selling the t-shirts.

Mike27

I suppose the root of my question was this..would a politician be considered any different from any other "celebrity" in this respect,for example on the tshirt graphic someone posted above,could a politician's image be considered fair game in the tradition of political sattire(as in broadsheet cartoons),and a freedom of expression of sorts?with or witgout financial gain...

Mike27

I suppose the root of my question was this..would a politician be considered any different from any other "celebrity" in this respect,for example on the tshirt graphic someone posted above,could a politician's image be considered fair game in the tradition of political sattire(as in broadsheet cartoons),and a freedom of expression of sorts?with or witgout financial gain...

Pat Mustard

Thoie wrote: »

Does the fact whether it's for commerical use or not come into play?

For example, if I take a picture of you out and about in public, and put it on a t-shirt that I'm wearing (no, I don't know why I'd do that), that would be OK, as no-one is making money from it.

If I made up 100 t-shirts with a picture I took of you, and sold them, it would then count as commercial usage and I'd need your permission I believe.

So for your original question, it would depend on whether you took the picture of Enda while he was out in public, and whether or not you're selling the t-shirts.

I think that it depends.

In Rihanna's case, she has a clothing range, and her case was made out in passing off.

If you printed one t shirt with a picture of a person that you taken on the public street, I would say that the person would have to look at suing you for:

1. Passing off, to the effect that you were attempting to cash in on their brand by using an image used by that brand.
2. An action for breach of privacy or breach of confidence.
3. Some other action like harassment or for emotional distress.

Most people don't have their own clothing ranges, so that might take passing off out of the running. Depending on the circumstances, I think that the likelihood of success in an action for breaching privacy or breach of confidence might be pretty low for someone complaining about being photographed in the in the public street (although I may be wrong on this - see Kane v Governor of Mountjoy Prison). I would think that an action for emotional distress should depend on the circumstances.

If you are not Rihanna or David Beckham, there may not be much of a case in relation to one shirt arising out of one photo taken on a public street.