Celebrities Are Being Sued For Posting Paparazzi Photos Of Themselves On Social Media (2024)

FAQs

Celebrities Are Being Sued For Posting Paparazzi Photos Of Themselves On Social Media? ›

In addition to Cyrus, Lipa and Kardashian, many other celebrities have found themselves facing copyright cases after posting photos of themselves. Justin Bieber and Ariana Grande have also been sued – by the same photographer who filed suit against Cyrus and Lipa this year.

Anyone else who wants to use the photo must get permission from the rights holder, including the person depicted in the image. While celebrities may have rights to their appearance under other laws, they do not have the right to use the photo if they don't own or license the copyright to it.

Miley Cyrus, the US singer, songwriter and actress, currently boasts an impressive Instagram following of 182 million. Paparazzo Robert Barbera has brought a copyright infringement claim against Miley for posting an image of herself, taken by Barbera as she left a building in 2020, to her followers.

Under the Supremacy Clause to the U.S. Constitution, federal law trumps state law when the two conflict. If a paparazzo's photo is considered an original work of expression, it is protected under the Copyright Act, and a right of publicity claim against it will likely fail. [19]Id.

The California Right of Publicity is a law that protects a person's name, image, and likeness from being used for commercial purposes without permission.

In addition to Cyrus, Lipa and Kardashian, many other celebrities have found themselves facing copyright cases after posting photos of themselves. Justin Bieber and Ariana Grande have also been sued – by the same photographer who filed suit against Cyrus and Lipa this year.

The new penalty for harassment of children by photographers or video camera operators is as long as a year in jail and a maximum fine of $10,000. The California Broadcasters Assn. and California Newspaper Publishers Assn.

Paparazzi tend to make a living by selling their photographs to media outlets that focus on tabloid journalism and sensationalism (such as gossip magazines).

As the paparazzi are not one organisation, there are not specific laws to ban them. However, protections for both paparazzis and their targets are covered in other legislation. Freedom of speech is protected under the first amendment in the United States.

While photographers are allowed to photograph people in public places in the state of California, they can face civil or criminal charges if their attempts to take photos demonstrate a gross disregard for a person's privacy or safety.

Why can't celebrities sue paparazzi? ›

Celebrities Sue Over Unauthorized Use of Identity. A right of publicity is the right to control the commercial value of your name, likeness, voice, signature, or other personal identifying traits that are unique to you. The right of publicity is all about identity.

Under U.S. copyright law, the person who “authored” a work is the copyright owner. This means that the photographer, not the celebrity whose picture is taken, owns the rights to the image.

It is generally OK for people to take photographs at any public place or any private place that they own or rent. Being present on someone else's private property generally requires the property owner's consent to take photos.

DON'TS: You can't post pictures that aren't yours without express permission of the owner (many times, the photographer is the owner). This includes photos of celebrities or public figures, even if everyone else is doing it. You could be the one who receives the cease and desist letter and demand for licensing fees.

The purpose of allowing the photography of others for editorial use is to promote education and the free press, two pillars of paparazzi work. Returning to the issue of copyright, celebrities often get in legal trouble when posting a paparazzi picture of them on an online platform.

Under “fair use” laws an artist is able to employ pre-existing images for social commentary and criticism. It is under this law that Saturday Night Live and Mad Magazine are able to do satires of movies and celebrities.

The simplest method is to get the celebrity's permission to use their likeness. This may require: Fees or royalties paid to the celebrity. Signing a legal agreement from the celebrity.

Even editorial photographs can come under scrutiny when a caption is added if the photo caption implies something false or libelous about the person in the picture. Similarly, one cannot misappropriate the likeness of a person, even a celebrity or politician, to promote any goods or services without permission.