Graphical Manipulation - Beheaded and Sold? 40
popdookey asks: "Can a known image of me be beheaded and marketed as someone else without my permission? I just returned home to Georgia and discovered that my head had been replaced on a favorite photograph that was now being used to promote sandwiches. It was a great photo of a few of the old-time employees and founders of a very successful restaurant franchise taken in front of its original location. The faces of the employees have been replaced with those of the wealthy but absent owners to create a more marketable and nostalgic image. It is great advertising, but 92.3% of that body is mine as was 100% of its contribution. Is this legal without my permission, and if so, wouldn't this lead to historical fraud?"
This has got to be the strangest Ask Slashdot. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:This has got to be the strangest Ask Slashdot. (Score:3, Funny)
Note to self: avoid prison.
Re:Revealed at last! (Score:1)
Correct me if I am wrong, but... (Score:2, Informative)
For the most part, whoever took the picture, owns it.
Those paparazzi guys make a killing selling photos to the Enquirer and other tabloids.
Re:Correct me if I am wrong, but... (Score:2)
Re:Correct me if I am wrong, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, you have to have a model release in order to use someone's likeness for commercial purposes. However, they have to be identifiable. Since the guy's head is removed, he's not identifiable, so there's no legal violation.
Examples: I can take a photo of you and publish it on my personal website. I cannot take a photo of you and publish it on my business website (korphoto.com [korphoto.com] if you're interested
Re:Correct me if I am wrong, but... (Score:2)
Re:Correct me if I am wrong, but... (Score:2)
whatabout all those paparazzi pix taken with ultra-long lenses. The celebrati hardly released those pictures, and they were harldy taken in a public place.
So is a public place any place where you can be seen from without tresspassing (or perhaps not even that restriction), or printing in a tabloid not a commercial use?
Re:Correct me if I am wrong, but... (Score:2)
Re:Correct me if I am wrong, but... (Score:2)
I can help.. (Score:4, Funny)
I love computers!
Hi. I'm Troy McClure (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hi. I'm Troy McClure (Score:3, Funny)
face it pal (Score:4, Funny)
simple (Score:3, Informative)
Re:simple (Score:2)
Bar association? (Score:1)
I know it's too early in the morning (Score:2)
I'll try reading it again at lunch.
You should talk to a lawyer (Score:5, Informative)
Key questions you need to answer:
1) Did you sign a written consent form allowing the company to use your photograph?
2) Do you have the original photograph to use as evidence that you are in fact the one in the picture?
3) Do you have current contact information for the other employees in the photograph that have been similarly misused?
4) Do you know when the ads first appeared, how long they have been running, and in what medium (newspaper, TV, magazines, web, etc.)?
5) Do you have samples of the advertisment in question that could be used as evidence?
6) What jurisdiction applies? If the ad was shown in California you may have more protections for use of your photograph; Georgia only appears to have such restrictions for serious crimes like child pornography.
Your action does not concern "fraud", per se. Fraud, legally, is decieving others for gain. What you need to focus on is the state statues that require an employee to provide written consent before that employee's photograph can be used for marketing purposes.
For more details, see a general discussion on the issue from FindLaw [findlaw.com]:
For instance, see California Civil Code Section 3344-3346 [findlaw.com]. I'll quote a small portion of this section which directly applies to your situation:
The company is likely to argue that, because your head is not visible, you cannot be readily identified under 3344(b)(2):
The company may also insist that your likeness is not "essential" to the advertisement, per 3344(c):
Re:You should talk to a lawyer (Score:1)
Get over it, Jared. (Score:4, Funny)
The terms of your contract specifically state that we can use your likeness in any way we want, including photoshopping some other dude's head onto your body.
Thank you,
The Subway Legal Department
You asked /. ??? (Score:1)
On that note, who's to say that he didn't improve the picture?
Not your face! (Score:1)
Likenesses are protected (Score:4, Interesting)
The fallback argument is that whoever took the original picture holds copyright, and the head-chopping promoters may not have secured rights properly. Track down the photographer and see if they knowingly released the photograph to these people.
Possible precedent (Score:2)
Re:Possible precedent (Score:3, Informative)
I'm guessing you have never hired a professional photographer?
I figure 3 days for the trip to Poland, 100+ shots of large-format film stock, add in airfare plus shipping costs for lighting and cameras, living expenses for photographer and assistant(s), disruption to plant while you pick out 50 employees and get them to pose, plus buy-out on the rights for the image(s) that you high-res scan and digitally comp together to get a f
Re:Possible precedent (Score:1)
To a company the size of Ford, that is trivial. Figure their profit on the sale of a new car is (to pick a number out of the air) $1000. If the offense they generated by cheaping out loses just thirty sales, worldwide, then they're behind what it would have cost to do it right.
My advice (Score:5, Insightful)
Otherwise you are going to have to get a lawyer, and consider what you could win (if anything) in a court of law. It's probably not going to be worth your while, the most likely thing is that they'll stop using that photo or photoshop in a completely different body. How does that benefit you? What will you get out of the whole affair other than wasting a few months of your precious time?
Personally, I think there are upsides to this. Suppose this chain becomes the next KFC, you'll have a funny story to tell out of the whole situation, which is probably more than you'll end up with by hiring a lawyer. Hell, I'd probably send them a letter mentionining I'd saw the photo and telling them it's Ok with me as long as they don't use my face.
For one thing think of the pickup lines, "I don't know about you, Ali's Felafel Pit really wanted my body."
Re:My advice (Score:1)
It seems like such a dangerous precedent that I decided to bounce the issue off of the collective slashdot knowledgebase first. Reading the comments leads me to believe that I should have given my permission first.
It is not my intention to gain anything from this. It is my intention to learn what can be done, if anything, to keep it from happening to me or others again. The potential to revise/abuse p
Re:Oprah's nice legs ... (Score:2)
Re:What was the result? (Score:2)
Got a nice printer? Get revenge! (Score:2)
Cut/Paste, print with a good inkjet, and at night post the new picture on their window...