Copyrights- Compensation according to Photographer’s Federation

Fortuna has a website with information on boat trips. On one of the pages a picture is shown of Volendam, comparable with the picture below, without a notification of who the photographer is. An intern downloaded the picture from the internet. The photographer is Van Loo, a professional photographer. When he sees the picture on the website, he writes a letter to Fortuna seeking a settlement, while claiming three times the usual amount in damages. The first time for the use of the photo, another time for payment after the fact and a final time for not presenting his name on the picture. (This is obligatory according to the Photographer’s Federation’s terms of delivery)

Fortuna removes the picture, but does act on the proposal. A law case follows, in which the judge sides with Van Loo. It did not matter that an intern placed the photo online, a professional company has the obligation to check who made the photo. Fortuna also has to pay the compensation claimed by Van Loo, as well as the largest part of his legal expenses.

copyright



Latest news
Hakuna matata and colonialism
Trademark BIG MAC not used ???
Abcor recommended as Dutch experts in the field of Intellectual Property Law
Scent marks & non traditional trademarks
Fees for Filing and Renewal of Trademarks in the Benelux about to change!
claimant
defendant
claimant
defendant

PURE - MENTOS

MENTOS has been selling chewing gum under the name MENTOS PURE FRESH for several years. In order to protect her rights MENTOS has registered the following trademarks: the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH, the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH 3 and a figurative depiction of the word PURE. Defendant sells chewing gum under the trademark DENTYNE PURE and has registered its logo as a trademark. Infringement or not?
Follow Abcor