painter used my photo without permission

<p>I shared a photo that I took of myself via text message with a friend who is also a painter.</p>

<p>The photo was intended to be a friendly share-just saying hello.(this was a head shot of me, totally tame :)</p>

<p>I did NOT intend or give him permission to use, copy or duplicate my photo in any other way, shape or form.</p>

<p>Upon visiting him I discovered that he had uploaded, enlarged and printed out my photo which he was now rendering a "paint by numbers" style portrait of me from my photo with oils onto a canvas.</p>

<p>I challenged his right to use my image. I was not happy about not being asked, consulted or anything at which point he vehemently told me that he did NOT need my permission and that he had every right to do whatever he wanted with the photo since I had shared it with him via text. He claimed that I no longer had any rights to my photo.</p>

<p>He is a long time and well known artist and at the time, I believed him. He completely shut me down.</p>

<p>As some time went by, I tried to be "ok" and tried feel "flattered" with this portrait since I believed there was nothing I could do, even though I was not happy about it.</p>

<p>He then informed me that it was going to be part of a series which cast me in a negative light. I was upset, and extremely opposed to this... I firmly objected to this to him and repeatedly vocalized my objections to him. Again his response was the same that I had no right to tell him what he could or couldn't do with MY image</p>

<p>The painting is now part of a completed series being shown on a professional website which represents artists and is for sale for $3,000 not only without my permission but with me actually challenging and objecting to it.</p>

<p>To my shagrin, I am unable to access the original photo (it was on a cell phone that bit it), but I do have photos of the painting in the works with the computer print out of my photo taped above the canvas clearly showing that it doesn't deviate from my photo at all.</p>

<p>Where do I stand? What are my rights to my photo and my image? Am I sunk since I cannot access the original photo?</p>

<p>Is it true that since I sent him a text of the photo he does not need my permission and can do whatever he chooses with the image?</p>

<p>I thank you in advance for reading and appreciate any advice and/or any relevant links or sites where I could pose or find the legal answer to this question. I have done some research on this subject but still not sure if I text a photo do I lose my rights to it and if not how to proceed.<br /> Thank You</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If he really is a long time artist, then he probably should be a bit more familiar with copyright. Showing him the image (by whatever mechanism you do so - handing him a print, sending a text message - doesn't matter) in no way diminishes your copyright. You establish that right in the act of creating the photo, and you don't surrender that right unless you do so rather formally, in writing. Your "friend" (I don't like using quotes like that, but this situation calls for it!) has no license from you, and certainly doesn't own the copyright.<br /><br />His painting is a derivative work. <br /><br />Not having the original makes this a little more difficult. Do you have any email or text messages from the painter that acknowledge that you took the photo?</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Is it true that since I sent him a text of the photo he does not need my permission and can do whatever he chooses with the image?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, that is not true. Not even close. Here's some reading, from the proverbial horse's mouth:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/">http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/</a></p>

<p>Your ownership rights and defamatory usage of an image of you will definitely depend on the laws where you live. Since nobody here has any idea of where that may be, it is inappropriate to specifically comment. Even though some rights exist in law, their enforcement may well depend on how well you are known....remember the distorted picture of Obama during his first campaign, which basically went unchallenged, although it presented a defamatory perspective of him.</p>

<p>It would seem to me that a complete replica of a photo in the form of a painting is a direct copyright infringement. It's explain in lay terms here:<br>

<a href="http://painting.about.com/cs/artistscopyright/f/copyrightfaq5.htm">http://painting.about.com/cs/artistscopyright/f/copyrightfaq5.htm</a></p>

<p>Stephen makes a good point. I rashly assumed that the OP lives in the US.</p>

<p>If you're going to pursue this, you need a lawyer...</p>

<p>Some artists seem to try to achieve fame and notoriety by deliberately inviting controversy as a means to gain publicity. One reaction would therefore be to just ignore him and refuse to be the other half of the argument. But still...annoying.</p>

<p>Assuming you are in the US, you own the copyright, and he has infringed. A guest photographer at our camera club told a side story about a painter that had copied one of his photographs that he had for sale at an art fair. He knew this because he later saw an almost identical copy of his image at another art fair. He sued and won a large amount. Ironically, the painter was much better known and had the skill to create original images, she was just being lazy.</p>

<p>My opinion (in the US): If it was "art" he had stolen, I would take legal action. But since this was a <em>selfie</em>, never intended to be art; you may have the law on your side, but you will get little sympathy from judges and juries.</p>

<p>How much do you value this friendship? He apparently is still a friend at some level. If you take legal action, the friendship will most likely end.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If you're going to pursue this, you need a lawyer...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not essential but usually a good idea.</p>

<p>I suppose a friend who would use your image without your permission and then dismiss your objections as irrelevant really isn't a friend, anyway. This whole thing reminds me of Noam Galai's <a href="http://screameverywhere.com/"><em>The</em> <em>Stolen Scream</em></a>. </p>

I think you should print out a few pages of the copyright law covering what is copyright and derivative works and give them to your friend so he can see what Title 17 of US copyright law really says. When it comes to copyright law most people rely on "I always thought.." or "I always heard..." or "I was told..." etc. Most of the stuff that people think they know is dead wrong:

 

If I change the photo it is not the same photo that was copyrighted so copyright doesn't apply = WRONG

 

If I paid for it or received it as a gift it is mine and I can make my own copies of it = WRONG

 

If it is on the internet it is public domain and free to use = WRONG

 

If it doesn't have a copyright symbol it is not copyright protected = WRONG

 

If it is not registered with the US Copyright office it is not copyright protected = WRONG

<p>1) You need to ask a lawyer for an opinion, not photographers<br>

2) Given that this is a friend of yours who knows what you look like and may well be in possession of other photos of you, and that you no longer have the original image to offer up for comparison to the painting, you would have a hard time proving in court that the painting is a copy of your photo.<br />3) Given that, copyright of the image is a secondary issue if an issue at all. The more important issue is whether he has your permission to use your image, in the form of a model release or otherwise.<br />3) To successfully sue someone, at least in the U.S., you generally need to show that you suffered a financial loss or some other form of damage. I don't see where you've suffered a financial loss, so the issue would most likely be whether the painting is defamatory to you in some way. If it were clearly your face in a commercial use (advertising for example) the rules for needing your permission are stricter than in a fine art situation, again under U.S. law.<br />4) I'm not a lawyer.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I think you should print out a few pages of the copyright law covering what is copyright and derivative works and give them to your friend so he can see what Title 17 of US copyright law really says. </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Probably worth waiting until you know that Durgess actually lives in the US, eh?</p>

<p>You'd be surprised how many people don't...</p>

I believe the OP posted from the state of Washington, USA.

<p>Let me see if I understand the sequence of events.</p>

<p>1. You took a "selfie" with a phone camera. You indicated that this was a head shot, so no nudity was involved, or if it were, it would not be significant.</p>

<p>2. You sent the image to a friend.</p>

<p>3. The friend painted a picture based on the image.</p>

<p>4. The friend is charging $3,000 for the painting.</p>

<p>I don't understand the legal ramifications, but if your friend sells the painting for three grand, he's one heck of a salesman. He should be giving seminars.</p>

<p>You friend is not William Prince by chance?</p>

<p>This story reminds me of photographer <em>David K</em>. <em>Langford vs the State of Texas, USA.<br /></em>Marc<em><br /></em>http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/kut/files/201011/sticker%20cowboy%20comparison.jpg<br /> http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Suit-centers-on-silhouette-cowboy-777399.php</p>

<blockquote>

<p>To successfully sue someone, at least in the U.S., you generally need to show that you suffered a financial loss or some other form of damage. I don't see where you've suffered a financial loss, so the issue would most likely be whether the painting is defamatory to you in some way. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Since when is copyright only about loss and/or damage? Is every unauthorized use equal to loss or damage? I don't see how this could possibly be the case. <br>

<br>

If I have not given a permission to use my image and/or oppose such later on (if no permission had yet been granted), then he/she has no right to use it in any way shape or form. <br>

<br>

I hope you're not implying that I can take somebody's image and do whatever I like with it, so long as I avoid causing loss or damage to the party (which are defined how?). I see no such possibility, or perhaps my principles are just dead wrong and I've been missing out big time.</p>