In this case study, a man put an image he took on to a website. Gap made baby clothes with what looks to be that image on it. The photographer thinks that he may be owed something by Gap because they are using his image.
In my opinion, there are many different images of cars. The question is raised about wires in the reflection, but it could very well be that man's image. In a business perspective, I think that if the man can prove he took the image before Gap worked on making that product, he would be able to sue for part of the profit of the shirt. The shirt was not made in any educational context. Hobbs states in chapter 2 that, "A work is automatically copyrighted at the moment of creation, as long as it exists in a fixed, tangible form." It is because of this that it would be illegal for Gap to use an image that was not theirs.
From an educational perspective, it would be legal to use the image. If the image was used for a project on cars, or a lesson plan to teach students abut cars, it would be legal. The educator and student would be covered under the Fair Use Doctrine to use the image under educational circumstances.
No comments:
Post a Comment