- May 6, 2024
- Posted by: legaleseblogger
- Category: Related News
Try Free Now: Legalese tool without registration
# Situation Overview:
Hi team,
Earlier this week, I went incredibly viral for a post on X where my dad shared the Arsenal score against Spurs at my wedding. The post gained significant traction and has been the subject of much attention.
# Unauthorized Usage by Mailonline:
The Mailonline reached out in the replies, requesting permission to use the images. Despite my clear refusal due to personal reasons, they went ahead and published the story anyway, utilizing screenshots of the images and quotes from my tweets.
# Seeking Compensation:
I am displeased with this unauthorized use of my content and would like to seek compensation for the infringement.
# Ownership of Images:
While the images in question feature both my and my wife’s likeness, they were actually captured by the photography company I had hired for the occasion. The copyright for these images is credited to the photography company on their website. Additionally, the photographer was approached by a researcher from SWNS for permission to use the video, which I consented to for the exposure it would provide.
# Legal Query:
Given the ownership of the images lies with the photography company and not me personally, I am unsure if I have grounds to demand compensation for their unauthorized use. I seek clarification on this matter to understand my rights in this situation.
# How AI Legalese Decoder Can Help:
AI Legalese Decoder can analyze the legal intricacies of your situation, including the ownership of the images, the implications of granting permission to third parties, and the potential for seeking compensation. By decoding the legal jargon and providing insights into your rights and options, AI Legalese Decoder can empower you to make informed decisions and take appropriate actions in response to the unauthorized usage of your content.
Try Free Now: Legalese tool without registration
AI Legalese Decoder: A Solution for Deciphering Complex Legal Language
Introduction
Legal documents are often filled with complex language and terminology that can be difficult for the average person to understand. This can be a major obstacle for individuals who are trying to navigate the legal system without the help of a lawyer. Fortunately, AI Legalese Decoder is a new tool that can help simplify the process of understanding legal documents by breaking down complex language into plain English.
How AI Legalese Decoder Works
AI Legalese Decoder uses advanced artificial intelligence technology to analyze legal documents and identify key terms and concepts. The tool then translates these terms into plain English, making it easier for the average person to understand the content of the document. By using AI Legalese Decoder, individuals can save time and frustration when trying to decipher legal documents on their own.
Benefits of Using AI Legalese Decoder
One of the main benefits of using AI Legalese Decoder is that it can help individuals save time and reduce the risk of misunderstandings when trying to understand legal documents. In addition, the tool can help individuals feel more confident in their ability to navigate the legal system on their own, without the help of a lawyer. By providing a clear and easy-to-understand translation of complex legal language, AI Legalese Decoder can empower individuals to take control of their legal affairs.
Conclusion
AI Legalese Decoder is a valuable tool for individuals who need help understanding complex legal documents. By translating legal language into plain English, the tool can help individuals save time, reduce frustration, and feel more confident in their ability to navigate the legal system. With the help of AI Legalese Decoder, individuals can take control of their legal affairs and make informed decisions about their rights and responsibilities.
****** just grabbed a
Not your footage so no claim from you against the Mail. Photographers could claim if they didn’t give permission (…but did they?).
Anything in your contract with the photographers requiring them not to license the footage to third parties? (Obviously you’ve given permission to license to SWNS specifically so if the Mail got it from them, nothing doing on that either.)
That video is hilarious, by the way. Also, congrats!
As already stated, no you don’t. The photographers would but it seems like you gave them permission to share it. Congratulations though and it’s a funny vid. Source, was a professional photographer for 15 years.
Thanks for the replies so far team. Confirming what I already suspected really, that it’s not really for me to say where it goes. I’m just relieved there were no more negative comments about my wife on the article. Bit of a hit and hope effort really. Thanks for your help so far!
SWNS is a wire service, so unfortunately if the Mail has a paid subscription to it (or any other media do for that matter) they’re entitled to use it. Screenshots are a legally murky area – but if they were from public posts then they may be legally in the clear. I am sorry to hear this has happened to you though – not what journalism should be!
The video isn’t yours to control. Added to that, you gave the photographer permission to license it.
It’s a great video, though. Shame it had to be the awful Daily Mail that used it.
You could call them out on twitter, I don’t think what they did gives you a right to compensation but it’s in bad form and I know I’ll not support a news site that asks permission then does it anyway after being told no
What is SWNS and what kind of permission did you give the photographer to use it? Outside of that what sort of permission did they have to use it outside of your use?
If you post on twitter, you are open to others sharing and wanting to use your content like you said, they asked and you said no, but I don’t think you’d have any comeback that would be worthwhile other than bad publicity and people likely wouldn’t be interested, because you put it out into the public arena yourself, similar happened to me years ago, pope was visiting and people built a big model of him from haybales and other things, it looked cool and I posted it on twitter and Facebook, really good photo too, got a message asking for it to be used by The Sun, said no, don’t like them, but they used it anyway, I asked a copyright person and they said I could take them on, but it would cost money and I’d lose out on the costs
The photographer owns the work and can do with it as they please UNLESS you have purchased the copyright which is rather rare.
If you had engaged with them when they reached out to you, you could almost certainly have negotiated a fee or compo.
Having rebuffed them and agreed the footage could be shared, you have no chance of getting money out of them.
Congrats anyway!
Man, if there’s one thing I hate more than the Daily Mail it’s Tottenham.
[deleted]
[removed]
You have a right to privacy. This trumps EVERYTHING. GDPR etc etc I’m a wedding photographer, with a VERY tight contract but your constant for your image to be used can be REVOKED at anytime by yourself
Im wondering if you could use a DMCA strike? Im not 100% sure