A legal conflict has erupted involving a former photographer for the British royal family, Glenn Harvey, who is taking legal action against a Chattanooga-based menswear retailer for allegedly using one of his photographs of Princess Diana without permission.
Glenn Harvey, known for his work with the royal family, has initiated a lawsuit against Bruce Baird & Co. in a federal court in Chattanooga.
Harvey claims he captured the image of Princess Diana during her visit to Barra, Scotland in 1985 and secured copyright for the photograph in 2019. He alleges that years later, he found the photograph displayed on the website of Bruce Baird & Co. in three distinct instances, all without his consent.
WHAT DO PRINCESS DIANA AND A HIGH-END SUIT STORE IN DOWNTOWN CHATTANOOGA HAVE IN COMMON?
— Latricia Thomas (@LatriciaTnc9) January 3, 2024
A Chattanooga menswear store is being sued for its use of this photo of Princess Diana that is used to sell a $400 coat on its website. pic.twitter.com/r7gA966db2
As part of his legal action, Harvey has presented evidence of what he describes as Bruce Baird & Co.'s unauthorized usage of his photograph of Princess Diana.
The lawsuit contends that the Chattanooga clothing retailer utilized his photograph for advertising and promotional purposes. Harvey is seeking a jury trial and is demanding compensation for damages, attorney fees, and any additional relief determined to be appropriate by the court.
1 Comment
mmm... Now ordinarily I'm all for photographers with claims like this - and I still am.
But given that the "ad" might be argued as editorial because it is merely making comment that Diana is wearing the jacket, I wonder if the legal case would be successful.
Here in the UK at least, we have a "Fair Use" claim for useage of video / photographic images when the image is the subject of discussion or editorial. So FS don't need permission to use a screen grab of the site, or for the images contained therein, because it is making editorial comment.
Both FS and this jacket company are certainly monetising the images (FS by way of attracting clicks, the jacket company by way of showing a celebrity wears their product), so this isn't a legal claim.
On this case it would be a VERY thin line, and would depend on the text contained. If I was their lawyer, I'd certainly be looking at Fair Use as an option, but I wonder how well it would stand up. I've discovered that what is right and what is legal, are very different things.
From a morality perspective, there should be a fair exchange of ££ to make this right.