In what is fast becoming one of my favorite blogs to read, PhotoAttorney Carolyn E. Wright, Esq. informs us of a copyright infringement case against the San Jose Mercury News, where they apparently used a photogaphers photo from a book in a book review. The publisher seems to be claiming that since most of the industry is using photos for use in reviews, that it neccesarilly qualifies based on the Commentary and Criticism provisions of the Fair Use doctrine.
After reading just the basics as provided, it does seem like an interesting case to watch. One of the the things I see is that a legitimate review does qualify. I wonder if the same is true in the movies. On TV, we see lots of clips from major motion pictures while people like Ebert & Roper provide commentary & criticism, but also framed in an editorial format. Do they pay for those clips? Also, what of the original contract of the photographer with the book publisher. Third party rights are usually requested for cover uses, but what of all the inside photos? Could the iddy-biddy fact that the SJMN cropped off a small copyright notice on the original photo be the arrow in their Achilles Heel?
I guess well wait to see what happens next…
