In a rather strange set of events, Queen Guitarist Brian May lashed out at a photographer after she filed a takedown request when the musician posted one of her photos of him on his Instagram without credit.
The issue began when the guitarist posted a picture of himself taken by Barbara Kremer without crediting her. She filed a takedown request with Instagram, which resulted in the post being removed and May’s account being disabled for about an hour while he resolved the issue. May then posted a screenshot of the takedown notice with the following caption:
Personally, I always find it a bit strange when someone like a musician shows either a misunderstanding of copyright or lashes out at someone for protecting it, as music is of course no stranger to this exact issue. I also find May’s response rather childish: purposely mentioning Kremer by name (presumably to drag her through the mud in front of his followers) and saying she’s exploiting him by using his image is both immature and shows a lack of understanding of copyright, something someone in his position should understand well. As for saying she should have messaged him because he normally posts credits, it seems silly to assume that she would know that or that she could even get through to one of the most famous guitarists of all time on social media. Luckily, many are defending her in the comments of the post.
Lead image by Mark Kieve, used under Creative Commons.
[via PetaPixel]
May should know better than to behave like this; he should also know that it's HER JOB to take photos like the one she took.
Agreed. The whole "I usually give credit" defense is very strange too. I don't get to steal a bottle of wine from the store and run out the door yelling, "it's ok; I usually pay!"
Well...shop owners will usually confront you, in a non-volatile situation, rather than call the police first. What he did was childish but she should have at least made an attempt to contact him first. What could have ended in a friendly relationship for her, and possibly better opportunities to photograph him, ain't happenin' now.
Well, in fairness, the way IG messages work, it's very possible there's a message request from her that got lost in the thousands I'm sure he receives. Even if not, yes, it might have possibly ended more amicably, but she wasn't obligated to handle it that way. The shop owner would certainly be within their rights to call the police.
Nobody is obligated to do anything and the pursuit of rights often gets in the way of friendship. I would rather die poor with lots of friends than wealthy, alone.
BTW, I just couldn't watch that movie. Bela Lugosi dying in the first few minutes, without so much as one line, should have tipped me off. I'll watch The Princess Bride again. :-)
Edit: I don't know anything about social media so I guess your first statement must be true. I hope she tried.
"I would rather die poor with lots of friends than wealthy, alone."
Couldn't agree more with that sentiment. And no worries, there's certainly nothing wrong with watch "The Princess Bride" an extra time. :)
I’d rather die wealthy with a ton of friends :)
"I would rather die poor with lots of friends than wealthy, alone."
I used to think that way, but there comes a point when people take advantage of you so much that you break. I became tired of being a doormat and I started standing up for myself. Those who use you aren't real friends.
I'm a Christian. I know what I'm supposed to do.
I wasn't telling you what to do. I was sharing my experience.
Me too.
This is not the first time I’ve seen something like this, yet all musicians try to crack down on piracy. I don’t understand how that disconnect can be there, should be easy for the musician to put themselves in the photographer’s shoes.
This is yet another example that photography (and digital medias in general: music, movies, etc ...) are doomed to be treated more and more as commodities even by the artists themselves. That's why it is now impossible to succeed in art if you're not a good in business (including at least a good mix of marketing, accounting, networking, administration) too. You cannot be "just an artist" anymore.
Just another has-been trying to make news and stay relevant. Sad, really.
Sorry (flamesuit on if people disagree), but I happen to agree with May on this one... All Kremer had to do was send him a message asking for credit. We also do not know if Kremer was there to document the show professionally or if she simply too the photo as a fan only to post it to her Instagram later and then get upset when she noticed May had shared her property without properly giving her credit???
Personally, I would have direct messaged the artist regarding the failure to give me credit and if he failed to respond after 72 hours or so then I would file a request with Instagram to pull the image... However that is a last resort, and mind you, the 72 hours is being generous in my book. Thoughts???
I agree, the time frame here is weird to me. It's like, and I'm assuming here, she didn't want him using the photo at all. To report the post as quickly as he says it was reported can only mean that there was zero attempt to keep it civil. Not sure where he pulled the photo from, but it doesn't seem to be from a personal account. As I said, the whole situation feels weird
well, Like someone said upthread - she may have messaged him and he didn't see it. if you are not following someone and they DM you, it goes into the requested page on your IG messaging. He doesn't have a slew of followers (120k) and only follows 60 people - but I'm sure he gets hit up often from his fans via DM. It looks like he does his own social, so there isn't someone constantly monitoring his incoming messages. How is someone supposed to get in touch with Brian to tell him? I think she did the right thing.
It was the speed at which she acted that implies that she did not even give him a grace period of 72 hours.. It's not an image being used commercially. There are no damages.
Okay, that said, what commercial use is the image? Is she selling the image? Is it in any way unique? If anything it was the celebrity to whom was inconvenienced. At the end if the day, May looks like a grumpy old man and the world now knows who Kremer is.
I would say it doesn't matter if anyone (artist or pirate) makes money off it. it's still the right of the artist.
At the very least, he used it. By using it to populating his IG feed with pictures, he promotes his image. So he's benefiting from her work.
She doesn't have to share your opinion, and is well within her rights of reporting infringement to Instagram. Also, it's more than a little ironic coming from someone who sued Vanilla Ice.
Of course she doesn't... but just as she is entitled to her opinion I am entitled to mine as well.. That's why we are having an open discussion right?
Storm in a tea cup.....in a day or two when the dust settles, a different attitude will emerge from both of them.
I’m a pro photographer and after shooting an up and coming musician a few years ago, we both signed paperwork that neither of us would post the images without crediting the other. Bur after that, she kept on crediting her entire entourage but failing to add me, to photos I shot and edited. I kept reminding her, but it kept on happening. I simply stopped working with her. I do wonder why Barbra K didn’t first ask Brian to add her name, rather than jumping to extremes so soon?
Maybe he is just getting angrier the more he looks like Sir Isaac Newton
You all need to realise that you're completely missing the point. He isn't complaining about the taking down of the photograph, I bet his account wouldn't have lost much if that photo hadn't been there in the first place, and I sure believe he would have credited her if he had been reminded of his unfortunate oversight (and of course I agree with the fact the it is an error on his part; he even admits it himself!) as he would have gained nothing from not doing it and could have ended up being sued in the process (which he probably wouldn't have risked, as he must have a keen understanding of how copyright works - much better than what the author "childishly" implies anyway - for all he must have had to battle for on legal ground). The one thing he is ranting about is that his account was banned without a single warning shot ! Had he been a photographer, you would have all been whining about how much damage had been done to his publicity by taking down his whole portfolio that way and how the person who didn't even try to get in touch with him had no decency or professional etiquette at all. I've had it with that typically american hypocrisy. Instead of pushing your rights all over the place as you're wont to do with your "let's sue everyone for everything" culture, try being decent people for a change. Not giving the other perspective of that story makes for a very biased article, which is regrettable.
1. She didn't sue him.
2. How is this American hypocrisy? Brian May is English and the photographer appears to be German. Not even sure what nationalities have to do with this anyway.
3. His account being banned was a choice made by Instagram; she simply wanted the photo taken down.
4. No, I don't think photographers would rant if another photographer posted work that wasn't theirs without credit and had their portfolio taken down because of it. That's generally exactly what most photographers would like to see happen when someone steals photos.
5. We don't know that she didn't try to get in touch with him. See my explanation in the comments above.
I think most of his comments were a commentary on general attitudes rather than the specifics of this case. While all your points are accurate, I think we're seeing the same kind of interactions, here, as occurred in the reported incident. As personalities and perspectives clash, someone must take the "high road" in order to stop the devolution in any incident. Neither of them did this. Again, as a photographer, I'm interested in her actions and how they affect her. She chose poorly. I'm basing that summation on the timeline issue as posited by Norman Perkel, above.
In fairness, we can't really conclude very much about the timeline, as we don't know if she tried to reach out to him or what the time intervals were. Second, we can argue she chose poorly in the sense of maximizing profitability as a photographer, but she's not legally or morally obligated to choose that path. She may have just not wanted the exposure on that stage for whatever reason: maybe she didn't think the photo was representative of her work, maybe she doesn't like that much attention, etc. Whatever the reason, it's her right at the end of the day to handle it as she did.
Time prevents me from treating all your suppositions and the numerous alternatives. Suffice to say, I think they both acted poorly. I didn't expect him to act properly (based on his career, not any knowledge of him, individually) but have no such expectations in her case so...I speculate.
I´m a profissional concert photographer and i work for the biggest names in music industry in Portugal and also for some of the biggest music festivals, so my concert images are putting food on my table, i cant afford to have my images used for free.
I see lots of music photographer happy when some band or musician shares is image in facebook or on instagram, and for me that is just stupid, right now Social Media is one of the bigest markets if we ara happy to see the potencial client use our images without paying then we should move to another profession .
Lets face it, wht do bands nead images for, during one year?
Cd cover, most probably they will make the photos with some fashion photographer and it done.
Promotion of the album, they will use the images made for the CD Cover.
Posters for the Tour, probably they will use the same as the CD Cover
so whats left for concert photograthers? the images of the concerts that will be used on social media to try to sell more tickets for the next show, that means that the concert images have some value, they help selling more tickts if whe give those images or free to the bands how do we make a living???? were are we going to sell the images? the bands only need one image
on social media to promote the next show and that image must be payed they dont give away the single for free to try to sell the album do they?
All valid points but, from what others have said, she wasn't shooting commercially.
100% agree Rui-once the infringement occurs the horse has left the barn.
It's refreshing that Instagram acted so quickly, the infringer will think twice before pulling that stunt again, if ever.
I could write a book on the manipulations infringers orchestrate to steal from content providers, it truly wears on a person and you end up being the bad guy if you complain.
What on earth is wrong with sticking to an honest and mutually agreed upon arrangement?
Try walking into a camera store and walking out with a $30,000 worth of photographic gear without paying for it- I guarantee, rough men in uniforms will be paying you a visit.
"Try walking into a camera store and walking out with a $30,000 worth of photographic gear without paying for it- I guarantee, rough men in uniforms will be paying you a visit."
Not if you're careful! :-)
Lol
First let me say that I am in total agreement with you on most of what you have to say here.. However the day I am competing with the quality of someone's mobile phone image to put food on my families plate is the day I hope I have already moved into another profession. Our images are significantly of higher quality, and in such we are not in competition with people in the crowd who are happy to get a snapshot at best.
Looking at the image, it was shot from the crowd. Many on the Instagram post are saying that cameras were not allowed in the crowd (as is common at concerts) Say she did have a dslr/mirrorless with an interchangeable lens, if concert staff had seen that, she probably would have been kicked out. If she was a random person in the crowd who took a photo with her cell phone, how would he know who to credit? Both of them could have acted differently, but I think taking down his account right away is a little excessive.
Dear Instagram, make a better way for an artist to seek credit. Simply asking is futile if the person posting the uncredited photo has a large following. There should be a way that you can upload the image to verify it was yours, then a priority notification to the user that posted it. Less banning, less shaming.
That would be interesting. "User blah has requested that you credit this image to them. You have four hours to agree to this request or dispute the credit." The problem, I think, is that getting credit even a few hours after the fact does little good for the photographer.
How about a suggested fee to the photographer written right in the process. I bet May would have gladly thrown a couple hundred dollars for a fast resolution if it was smoother and became the norm. And yes, I'm being an optimistic idealist.
If you can't source the content provider, then it's a no until/if you broker an agreement.
Is it not common courtesy to send a note first rather than create a firestorm? Respect is a two way street and one can send a note through Instagram to inquire about a photo credit. I think there were mistakes made by both sides which could have been handled better. It appears to me, the photographer may have suffered more damage than Mr. May.
Anyone with a large following like May (over 100K) probably isn't checking all their messages. I agree this was handled poorly.
I looked up this same story on other sites to see how people reacted and an interesting question was raised.
She took this at a concert. If we assume she was just a fan at the concert and not hired by the venue or Brian, does she still have legal copyright claim to the photograph if photography was prohibited at the venue? Could the venue claim rights to the photo? This is something I genuinely don't know.
Yes, she does. Venue policies do not override copyright law.
So all they could do is ask her to leave their property?
Correct.
.