Kim Kardashian Sued for Posting Photo of Herself, Hiring Own Personal Paparazzo to Avoid Future Legal Disputes

Kim Kardashian Sued for Posting Photo of Herself, Hiring Own Personal Paparazzo to Avoid Future Legal Disputes

Posting a paparazzi photo and being sued for it is becoming quite the trend in Hollywood. In what appears to be an increasingly common scenario, Kim Kardashian is the latest celebrity to be facing legal action after she posted the photo, with the photographer now suing for “any profits she made off the Instagram post.”

The photo in question – which we’re not posting for obvious reasons – appeared on Kardashian’s Instagram page in October 2018, racking up 2.2 million likes. But as per TMZ, the photographer behind the snap, Saeed Bolden, is now taking legal action. He claims she posted the image without his permission, and certainly didn’t compensate him financially for doing so.

Bolden is seeking any profits she made on the back of the Instagram post, and also wants "punitive damages." Interestingly, he is also suing Skims Body, Kardashian’s shapewear clothing line, despite the fact the company’s Instagram account never posted the image in dispute.

The increasing likelihood of celebrities landing in hot water for posting a photo of themselves clearly hasn’t gone unnoticed, as Kardashian recently hired her own paparazzi photographer, so as to avoid any further legal battles. It comes after fan accounts were being shut down for posting unauthorized photos. “Btw [sic] since the paparazzi agencies won’t allow the fans to repost, all of my pics are taken by my own photog and you guys can always repost whatever you want,” she said.

Log in or register to post comments

63 Comments

liliumva's picture

I tend to be on the side of the photographer in these matters as it is their work, their copyright, regardless of who is in the photo. But I question why it took this photographer so long to sue KKW? I'm unaware of their location and do not know their statue of limitations, but I imagine a judge might see the near two years of waiting to be an issue. Especially given that KKW is such a big name, it's not like the photo was hidden. It could just be that they're jumping on the bandwagon and try to get a slice of the pie. That said, it is still his work, his copyright, and right of publicity doesn't apply here.

LA M's picture

Sigh....

I'm never hiding in bushes or bum-rushing some celeb to get a shot but this story (if true) should be handled strategically.

If a celeb is willing to use a photo shot by one of these photographers without attribution and or compensation then they technically give up the right to complain about privacy or compensation themselves...etc. Fair game.

Deleted Account's picture

Paparazzi are about the lowest form of life imaginable.

Mark Rowe's picture

Edward, do you honestly mean that? Lowest form of life... Come on... this is a photography website and community.

Once again, I’m astounded by the inability to be respectful and constructive.

I don’t personally know any Paparazzi, and I’m betting you don’t know all of them, am I correct? How can you make that judgement and completely baseless comment without knowing all of them personally?

The reason I’m passionate about this is that I also run a property business. Comments like yours are often thrown about in a generalised fashion in that industry too, without a single thought for the individuals who are in the job. I’m no snow flake, but to make unintelligent generalised hits against a profession is just plain stupid and misguided.

Stoopy McPheenis's picture

Having spent decades in LA being actually hired by celebs and seeing the way they get treated by paparazzi makes me have very little sympathy for anyone that chooses that career. Of course there are a few respectable paparazzi.... But, they're few and far between.

Mark Rowe's picture

And that few are ‘the lowest form of life’?

Stoopy McPheenis's picture

No, those few aren’t. But a concerning amount of them are willing to put other people’s lives and safety at risk for a shot.... and not even a particularly good shot. Which is why I have little sympathy for paparazzi.

Mark Rowe's picture

Okay, then that’s a different thing all together. My reply was to the initial comment that Edward made regarding them as ‘the lowest form of life’.

Stoopy McPheenis's picture

I try not to overgeneralize or use too much hyperbole. I will say that far too many paparazzi have questionable values. My advice to up and coming photographers would be to think very seriously before choosing that path.

Stuart Carver's picture

Unfortunately their behaviour in the past means they often get tarred with the same brush. Princess Diana is the immediate one that springs to mind.

I’ve only come across one personally and it was on a large Facebook photography group, the guy was an arrogant prick who had far too much of an opinion about his own abilities.. and his ‘street’ photos that he posted included pictures of the homeless seeking shelter from the elements and people staring at his camera normally with some accompanying story about getting into a scuffle with said subject... so as far as I’m concerned all he did was promote the ‘lowest form of life’ tag. Not somebody I’d ever want within 5 miles of my personal space.

Stoopy McPheenis's picture

Diana is one of the best examples but that behavior is all too common. I witnessed paparazzi actually cause an accident with Maria Shriver at her kid's public elementary school. I've seen professional photogs that were hired to cover a private event be physically shoved out of the way by uninvited paparazzi. I've also been on closed sets where paparazzi have managed to take photos from bushes or other hiding spots and sell them for a profit.

Pretty shady, if you ask me.

Mr Blah's picture

You are right. His comment was actually offensive to the new Chinese virus...

Deleted Account's picture

Hey, you know what, next you can defend people who photograph people raping children; because we're all photographers.

Mark Rowe's picture

Wow, Edward. Just.. wow..

Deleted Account's picture

In your world every piece of shit gets a pass because they are a photographer.

Mark Rowe's picture

That’s not what I said, but keep it coming Edward...

Deleted Account's picture

Yeah, now you backpedal.

Mark Rowe's picture

Edward... Go on, you can have the last word 😊

Jonathan Brady's picture

What about those who would take advantage of them? Where do they rank?

Deleted Account's picture

Did you just attempt to justify stalking by means of an appeal to hypocrisy?

Stupid or immoral? You decide, audience.

Jonathan Brady's picture

Ummmm... Nope. Not justifying anything. Simply pointing out that taking advantage of the lowest of the low establishes a new low. I'm not attempting to elevate the paparazzi. I'm chastising celebrities.
Call me whatever you want but I have a question while you do so... Do you only don warpaint behind the safety of your keyboard?

Deleted Account's picture

STFU and go learn logic.

Jonathan Brady's picture

🤣🤣🤣😂😂😅😄😀🙂😐😒...
🥱
🤭😀😅😂🤣🤭
🙄

Deleted Account's picture

And btw, your feeble attempt to bring my masculinity into the conversation says far more about your insecurities than anything about me.

Jonathan Brady's picture

There are female warriors. Adding misogynist to your list of personality traits.

Deleted Account's picture

I think you may be reading just a little much into my response - indeed, you have alleged misogyny in the total absence of evidence. I'm sure there are many more completely irrelevant ways you can try to personalise your pathetic responses.

Jonathan Brady's picture

Good luck in life. You're gonna need it.

Deleted Account's picture

Funny, because life is pretty good.

But once again, your attempt at a personalised rebuttal is absolutely pathetic.

John Ohle's picture

Will people please stop feeding the troll.

Deleted Account's picture

I don't think the word "troll" means what you think it means.

More comments