At first glance, it’s just Bella, walking down the street in a typical ’90s throwback outfit. What really got me thinking about all of this was this photo of Bella Hadid that JustJared posted on Instagram last week. Nothing in life is really a coincidence, so let’s dive into the world of paparazzi photos as sponsored content. Whether by calling the paparazzi on themselves, carefully placing products in the photos, or fully staging fake pap pics, it’s all a complicated game to sell product. Rather than stars getting caught unaware without underwear on, we’ve entered an era of paparazzi pics as marketing gold. Now, both famous people and major brands have figured out how to take the standard paparazzi photo, and make it work for them. But paparazzi photos are still alive and well, and in the age of #spon, they often have deeper context than it first appears. Now, so many of them post their own photos that we don’t have to wait for them to go to the gas station barefoot to get a glimpse of what they’re up to. They were everywhere in the 2000s (think of all those classic Britney Spears photos), but the rise of social media changed the way we get our images of celebrities. I really feel like in 2019, paparazzi photos don’t get enough love. Paparazzi photos are not just random photos photographers capture of celebs in their natural habitat-they can often be used as promo. If that phrase just shocked you, I’m sorry I disillusioned you, but it’s time to grow up. But one #spon trend that’s always fascinating to me is the use of paparazzi photos as an advertising tool. These days, even the biggest names are doing ads for everything from food products to lube, so not much throws me off anymore. At first, it seemed random and desperate for A-listers to be earning their paychecks over Instagram, but things have changed a lot. “It’s social media.At this point, we’re all pretty accustomed to celebrities doing sponsored posts on Instagram. “It’s not like the celebrity is taking the photo and it is being put on a billboard or advertising campaign or something like that,” he said. But Harrison said photographers should just accept that the occasional copyright infringement is a minor occupational hazard. Two other photo agencies, BackGrid and Splash News, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. One of the biggest repositories of celebrity photos, Getty Images, declined to comment for this story. “I personally believe that the agencies are making so little money on directly selling the images to people that they have to resort to essentially shaking down celebrities to make money,” he said. Harrison said he thinks the spike in lawsuits is due to the fact that photo agencies and photographers are making less money these days. Many celebrities slyly engage their own photographers or work in conjunction with them to snap their “candid” styles to avoid these type of legal hassles, he added. “I think you should be flattered that a celebrity thinks your picture is good enough to be posted on their social media,” he said. Celebrity photographer Giles Harrison said it bears remembering that they are making money off the stars in the first place. Sullivan said that while celebrities might be able to make the case that the photographer is profiting off their likeness, most simply decide to take the easier route and settle.īut not all entertainment photographers believe infringement lawsuits are justified.
Photographers can also sue for loss of profit and legal fees. Sullivan said the penalties for willful infringement are steep - $150,000 for each violation. “The subject of the photo doesn’t have any rights to the picture as long as it was taken in a public place.” “The photographer owns the copyright to the photograph it doesn’t matter who is in it,” said entertainment lawyer Bryan Sullivan. It may seem counterintuitive that one's own image can be out of bounds, but legal experts said copyright law clearly favors the photographer. The Instagram story added the caption, “Today was a good day.” J.Lo was sued last week after posting a photo of herself in a striped blouse and high-waisted pants that was taken by professional photographer Michael Stewart. Someone on her team then tweeted it out to her 7 million Twitter followers. The photographer said he had only licensed the photo for limited use to the Daily Mail when Simpson posted it on her Instagram account, which has 4 million followers. Simpson was sued in January after she posted a photo of herself leaving the Bowery Hotel in New York. The two parties eventually reached an undisclosed settlement. Khloé later admitted that she saw the photo on a fan website and reposted to her widely followed Instagram.
Kardashian was sued in 2017 for copyright infringement after using a photographer's picture of her going to dinner at a Miami restaurant without permission.