Potential licencing scandal?

sashbar

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Dec 13, 2012
Messages
3,044
Reaction score
1,183
Location
Behind the Irony Curtain
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
There is some potentially embarrassing story developing in Russia about the new 100 Rb "Olympic" banknote depicting a snowboarder. (Russia hosts Winter Olympics next year)
The competition for a banknote design was won by a student designer who apparently used a stock image with restricted rights without letting the organisers know. The other story says the student had submittted the sketch and later on that photo was used by another artist, hired by the issuer.. Anyway, the Central Bank has issued TWENTY MILLION banknotes before that story surfaced. I guess, if all this will be proved true, the photographer is well-setteled fo life now. The photographer is Swiss and judging by the camera he was using on the ski slope in 2005 (1D Mk II) he is a professional. How much could be a potential lawsuit in your opinion? Oh yes, and there was mo model release either.. I am not sure if it is needed bearing in mind the guy on the banknote is not recognisable.

I have to add that we do not know for sure yet if the Riussian Central Bank has indeed signed the agreement with the photographer, because there was no official reaction yet.
But all circumstances point at the lack of any agreement.

Here is the initial blog later picked by the media, with the image of the banknote and the original photo:

?? ???? ??? ?????? ? ??????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ??????????? ??????????? ? ???????? ? TJournal

The licence agreement for this image says any use in a logo, trademark, promotion, commercial product or distribution of the image are forbidden.
What are your thoughts about it ?
 
Last edited:
Knowing Russia I a assume this will end up in a shooting or beating all of which will be captured on a dashcam.

Too me it looks so little like the original image I'd say let it go.
 
A Swiss photographer and a Russian bank?

Unless the bank simply acknowledges what's happened, and assumes responsibility, the photographer's going to be hard pressed to be "well-settled". I suppose if he wants to sue the Russian Central Bank he can, but the image on the note is significantly different than the original...
 
A Swiss photographer and a Russian bank?

Unless the bank simply acknowledges what's happened, and assumes responsibility, the photographer's going to be hard pressed to be "well-settled". I suppose if he wants to sue the Russian Central Bank he can, but the image on the note is significantly different than the original...
My guess is he's going to have to settle for bragging rights...
 
Knowing Russia I a assume this will end up in a shooting or beating all of which will be captured on a dashcam.

Too me it looks so little like the original image I'd say let it go.

Wow... that sounds more like Los Angeles. As I understand it in Moscow they usually shoot the guy with the dash cam too - lol
 
If you zoom in on the face in the bill, it totally looks like a skeleton.
 
won by a student designer who apparently used a stock image with restricted rights ... The licence agreement for this image says any use in a logo, trademark, promotion, commercial product or distribution of the image are forbidden.

What kind of stock image doesn't allow for distribution of the image?
 
Knowing Russia I a assume this will end up in a shooting or beating all of which will be captured on a dashcam.

Too me it looks so little like the original image I'd say let it go.

Wow... that sounds more like Los Angeles. As I understand it in Moscow they usually shoot the guy with the dash cam too - lol

Yes. They also shoot the shooter, just in case.
 
won by a student designer who apparently used a stock image with restricted rights ... The licence agreement for this image says any use in a logo, trademark, promotion, commercial product or distribution of the image are forbidden.

What kind of stock image doesn't allow for distribution of the image?

That's the agreement:

You may not use the Image

  • For pornographic, unlawful or other immoral purposes, for spreading hate or discrimination, or to defame or victimise other people, sociteties, cultures.
  • To endorse products and services if it depicts a person.
  • In a way that can give a bad name to SXC or the person(s) depicted on the Image.
  • As part of a trademark, service mark or logo.
  • SELLING AND REDISTRIBUTION OF THE IMAGE (INDIVIDUALLY OR ALONG WITH OTHER IMAGES) IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN! DO NOT SHARE THE IMAGE WITH OTHERS!
Always ask permission from the photographer if you want to use the Image

  • In website templates that You intend to sell or distribute.
  • For creating printed reproductions that You intend to sell.
  • On "print on demand" items such as t-shirts, postcards, mouse pads, mugs (e.g. on sites like Cafepress), or on any similar mass produced item that would contain the Image in a dominant way.
 
won by a student designer who apparently used a stock image with restricted rights ... The licence agreement for this image says any use in a logo, trademark, promotion, commercial product or distribution of the image are forbidden.

What kind of stock image doesn't allow for distribution of the image?

That's the agreement:

You may not use the Image

  • For pornographic, unlawful or other immoral purposes, for spreading hate or discrimination, or to defame or victimise other people, sociteties, cultures.
  • To endorse products and services if it depicts a person.
  • In a way that can give a bad name to SXC or the person(s) depicted on the Image.
  • As part of a trademark, service mark or logo.
  • SELLING AND REDISTRIBUTION OF THE IMAGE (INDIVIDUALLY OR ALONG WITH OTHER IMAGES) IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN! DO NOT SHARE THE IMAGE WITH OTHERS!
Always ask permission from the photographer if you want to use the Image

  • In website templates that You intend to sell or distribute.
  • For creating printed reproductions that You intend to sell.
  • On "print on demand" items such as t-shirts, postcards, mouse pads, mugs (e.g. on sites like Cafepress), or on any similar mass produced item that would contain the Image in a dominant way.

Oh, well, then, the use mentioned should be fine. None of that conflicts with the use in question.
 
I think it's recognizable - look at the cuff of the glove on the hand holding the board, the straps over the shoes, the pocket flaps on the pants, the side of the vest - even many of the creases and folds of the fabric look the same.

Since apparently the designer used the photographer's photo, that's usage - it would depend on the terms of the stock site how the photographer would be notified or compensated. Apparently it says restricted use; I don't know what that means on whatever site it was on.

With the designer and photographer being from different countries and it having been used for the Olympics I don't know what jurisdiction this would be under. I think doing something like this at the very least is going to damage the designer's reputation; if someone uses another artist's work how will someone be able to trust that person? If he's a student it could be that he'd be given another chance and he might be able to move forward from this but it seems like it could still put doubt in people's minds about how ethical his work will be.
 
Does the licensing of a Swiss photographer's work apply to the Russian jurisdiction?
From the OP, the student designer would be the one that breached the license agreement.

The artist hired by the issuer, and the issuer would then have legal exposure to a copyright infringement action.
Switzerland and Russia are both signatories of the Berne Convention - Berne Convention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - so Swiss copyright law would apply.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top