Forum 1: Photography and The Law
Between 1999-2001 Philip-Lorca diCorcia photographed pedestrians in Times Square, NYC.
The resulting works were shown at Pace/MacGill Gallery in Chelsea. When Erno
Nussenzweig, an Orthodox Jew and retired diamond merchant from Union City,
N.J., saw his picture in the exhibition catalogue, he sued diCorcia and Pace
for exhibiting and publishing the portrait without permission and profiting
from it financially. The suit sought an injunction to halt sales and
publication of the photograph, as well as $500,000 in compensatory damages and
$1.5 million in punitive damages.The suit was eventually dismissed by a New
York State Supreme Court judge who said that the photographer's right to
artistic expression trumped the subject's privacy rights.
The resulting works were shown at Pace/MacGill Gallery in Chelsea. When Erno
Nussenzweig, an Orthodox Jew and retired diamond merchant from Union City,
N.J., saw his picture in the exhibition catalogue, he sued diCorcia and Pace
for exhibiting and publishing the portrait without permission and profiting
from it financially. The suit sought an injunction to halt sales and
publication of the photograph, as well as $500,000 in compensatory damages and
$1.5 million in punitive damages.The suit was eventually dismissed by a New
York State Supreme Court judge who said that the photographer's right to
artistic expression trumped the subject's privacy rights.
Mr. Nussenzweig's lawyer, Jay Goldberg, told The New York Law Journal that his
client "has lost control over his own image" he went on to say
"It's a terrible invasion to me," Mr. Goldberg said. "The last
thing a person has is his own dignity."
client "has lost control over his own image" he went on to say
"It's a terrible invasion to me," Mr. Goldberg said. "The last
thing a person has is his own dignity."
When is it right or ethically wrong to make an image? Think of yourself in the
position of the subject and ask yourself, am I happy to be photographed and be
unaware of it?
position of the subject and ask yourself, am I happy to be photographed and be
unaware of it?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was the starting point of a group discussion that myself and some peers were set regarding the topic of Photographers rights. When you think of Photography as a whole, what are our rights as amateur and professional Photographers when it comes to doing things such as producing photographs in public places?
When you think of a controversial body of work that relates to this topic of the law and Photography. Philip Lorca Dicorcia is the first person who's work springs to mind with his series "Heads" (2002)
The subjects in this body of work were unaware of themselves being photographed and then exhibited. One of the subjects displayed in this body of work went on to claim $1.5m in punitive damages for being unknowingly featured in this body of photographic work.
The subjects in this body of work were unaware of themselves being photographed and then exhibited. One of the subjects displayed in this body of work went on to claim $1.5m in punitive damages for being unknowingly featured in this body of photographic work.
Philip Lorca Dicorcia - #Head 10 from the series "Heads" (2002)
Image Source - http://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/philip-lorca-dicorcia-head-10-2002
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Controversy: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights
"DiCorcia’s Heads series was at the center of a debate between free speech advocates and those concerned with protecting an individual’s right to privacy. In 2006, one of diCorcia’s subjects sued the artist and his gallery for exhibiting, publishing, and profiting from his likeness, which was taken without permission. While critics claim that the project violated his subjects’ right to privacy, diCorcia explained that he did not seek consent because, “There is no way the images could have been made with the knowledge and cooperation of the subjects.”
Free speech advocates argue that street photography is an established form of artistic expression and that the freedom to photograph in public is protected under the first amendment to the United States Constitution. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed, but the presiding judge suggested the complex nature of this issue, stating, “Even while recognizing art as exempt from the reach of New York’s privacy laws, the problem of sorting out what may or may not legally be art remains a difficult one.”1 The debate rages on"
http://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/philip-lorca-dicorcia-head-10-2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Wilson: Whilst the body of work is interesting. It's wrong to a degree due to how they image's have been taken. The idea of being photographed without permission or having any knowledge of later having your face displayed on exhibition, is a wrong move for a Photographer if they intend to not be persecuted. Whilst the actual look and technical aspect of each portrait is unique and clever. Coming from a UK citizen's point of view, it just reminds me of the everyday typical paparazzi shots that we see on the front of gossip magazines. I used to actually like this piece of work, but after looking over it more and more. My personal feelings towards the work has changed.
Regarding the statement of how one of the subjects photographed in this body of work, requested $1.5m in punitive damages. I do question the idea of how the situation would have been dealt with if the series was shot in the UK rather than the US.
When you think about it though, how different is being Photographed without permission any different to being caught on camera on television like whilst at a Football match?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following screenshots below are screenshots of some the Photographers rights that we in the UK are entitled and not entitled to.
The following screenshots below are screenshots of some the Photographers rights that we in the UK are entitled and not entitled to.
Source - http://www.photographersrights.org.uk/page6/page6.html
Useful articles and online videos
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/arts/art-in-review-philip-lorca-dicorcia-heads.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2002/jan/30/artsfeatures4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpawWn1nXJo
No comments:
Post a Comment