Photographer Sues Apple for Using 'Eye Closeup' Photo Without License
LIKE
TWEET
SHARE
PIN
SHARE
POST
MAIL
MORE
Posted October 13, 2012 at 6:19pm by iClarified · 17299 views
Photographer Sabine Liewald of Switzerland has filed suit against Apple for using her 'Eye Closeup' photo in its Retina Display MacBook Pro campaign without a license, reports Patently Apple.
The high resolution photo was obtained from the plaintiff's agent, Factory Downtown, for layout purposes only. Apple was reportedly aware that it did not have the rights to use the photo.
The company allegedly informed Factory Downtown that it didn't intend to use the photo but then proceeded to "copy, publish, and exploit Plaintiff's photograph, including in its MacBook Pro advertising campaign, keynote addresses and related advertising materials without permission or compensation."
Liewald says she's entitled to actual damages including defendant's profits; statutory damages for the infringing use of the "Eye Closeup" photograph.
Exactly... She did nothing wrong. Apple stole from her now its time for the thieves to pay up...... Pay Up Apple....... I hope she becomes really famous like Picasso...lol
Fuck that photographer .If one paper use this he doesn't sue because they give free publicity but other than media they will go to court because they want money but they are also giving publicity with free cost
I know for a fact that Apple where the first to steal patents especially when it came to the cell phone, they stole from Nokia antenna design and paid for it making sure nobody knows, also I've been using WiFi sync since the iPhone 3G invented by a British guy they stole it from him including the icon, he talked about it only once never repeated, so I'm pretty sure Apple paid him under the table with a none disclosure agreement, so if any body think that Apple is so clean think again!!!
I know right, Apple sues everything and everyone whether its a minor thing, or something big, and once someone sues apple its bad. this is business, this way this photographer gets recognised as well, for example i didnt know who took this pic, for all i know apple made this pic, but now we all know that this is not so... so, good publicity for photographer, bad for apple and good money for photographer its a win win for Sabine.. and apple will not get poorer even if they pay out a million in compensation for her, im sure they have large provision for this sort of cases in the accounting budgets.
If another party steals or uses Apple's Intellectual Property, like Samsung, then it's alright to sue the Hell out of them. If Apple steals another's IP, like this photo or the Swiss clock, and the other party wants to be rightfully compensated, then they're greedy bastards.
It's the same principle as with music and all other art. If it belongs to someone and they don't agree to share it then pay up. So many poor people even got sued and prosecuted during the napster and Kazaa times. Also People this has nothing to do with iProducts anyhow. Don't get your panties in a bunch you fruitcakes.
We may live in over litigious times, but this is not at all excessive or frivolous. Photographers don't make money when someone uses their work without paying for it.
I will now sue Sabine Liewald for having a close up of my eye without a license. I'm entitled to actual damages including defendant's profits; statutory damages for the infringing use of my eye closeup photograph. It is also plain creepy that she has a photograph of my eye in the first place. I demand $1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, her unborn child and a restraining order against her.