Jun 16, 2021·editededit nvm
if he's selling the photos of HOV, then he needs to pay HOV for the rights to his likeness
apparently the law differs between editorial use and commercial use
if he wasn't selling the photos, he'd win this
Jun 16, 2021
Never seen this pic before dope asf
Jun 16, 2021·edited·2 replieslol, Jay-Z is wack as hell for using the "formerly-unknown black teenager" card to try and garner sympathy with the public. Jay was 27 years old when Reasonable Doubt Came out. He made it seem like the pictures were taken when he was 9 years old or something, lol
Hov, you truly wack for that.
Nas would never.....
Jun 16, 2021Majin GoldenChildTalking out of your ass
Mannion has ownership over his art
Just like all the other photographs in his catalogue
Yes and no. He was hired to do a shoot versus being hired to do a shoot. There is a difference. I believe he owns the ownership but without seeing the contracts this is all speculation. Both sides could be true.
However, I think Jay Z is just trying to muscle him for the ownership of his best photographs
But what I said remains true. This is a very common argument between photographers and the client of who owns the photography after a job.
- Jun 16, 2021A E M 7· edited
lol, Jay-Z is wack as hell for using the "formerly-unknown black teenager" card to try and garner sympathy with the public. Jay was 27 years old when Reasonable Doubt Came out. He made it seem like the pictures were taken when he was 9 years old or something, lol
Hov, you truly wack for that.
Nas would never.....
Jay is a ruthless businessman. He just wants to own these iconic images.
Jun 16, 2021
seezusthe photographer owns the rights to the photos
Hov takes yet another L
- Jun 16, 2021
I like Hov but this is a b**** move. Almost like when Juicy J sued Suicideboy$ for sampling their songs even though he has always pushed their music.
- Jun 16, 2021mctate
bro imagine taking sick ass pictures of an upcoming artist and then when they become a billionaire they sue you for selling them
if theres no "hey i own the rights to these you dont as the photog" then its slimy
let this man make a living selling high quality prints. photogs/videographers always getting screwed like this
- Jun 16, 2021
Mf would prolly sell his kids to get more money
- Jun 16, 2021
HOV showing yet again why hes a piece of s*** business man
Jun 16, 2021teenager
Jun 16, 2021·1 replybloomYou’re putting on a fake ignorant act to look cool. Lame
My post came off as cool?
- Jun 16, 2021
RIP Chi Modu thats all ima say
- Jun 16, 2021
Anytime there’s a court case everyone on KTT all of a sudden a lawyer. I stated my opinion on the matter. It’s up to the judge to decide and if it’s as easy as you guys claim it is with the first amendment it shouldn’t even make it to trial
Zaywop 💊Jun 16, 2021
French
- Jun 16, 2021·1 reply
greatestY’all just don’t know how s*** works and it’s easier to say that. First amendment protects all photographers because they took the pic. The only way the person who the pic is of has rights to the pic can own that pic is by buying that pic. It’s law.
I never claimed to be an expert my post is my opinion on the topic. I didn’t say Jay was going to win the case. I also don’t think it’s as simple as you make it seem when it comes to professional pictures of celebrities especially for a photo shoot of an artists album but we will see
Jun 16, 2021fiveprestos“ironic that a photographer would treat the image of a formerly-unknown Black teenager, now wildly successful, as a piece of property to be squeezed for every dollar it can produce. It stops today.”
like how f***ing pathetic lmfao
slimeball mf trying to use idpol to squeeze money out of a photographer using photos which he has the right to do so
- Jun 16, 2021A E M 7
lol, Jay-Z is wack as hell for using the "formerly-unknown black teenager" card to try and garner sympathy with the public. Jay was 27 years old when Reasonable Doubt Came out. He made it seem like the pictures were taken when he was 9 years old or something, lol
Hov, you truly wack for that.
Nas would never.....
- Jun 17, 2021·1 reply
You really gotta be a major weirdo and super insecure to defend Jay for this lol
Jun 17, 2021trying to cut Jay out huh
Jun 17, 2021·4 repliesMyBallsAndMyWordYou really gotta be a major weirdo and super insecure to defend Jay for this lol
Not really.
If he was hired for a single shoot, and compensated for the shoot, that doesn't inherently mean you can use the other photos and outtakes for profit.
Jun 17, 2021Billionaire needs more millions
Jun 17, 2021
Kendrik lamaS*** I just realised Jay-Z haven't used his face on album covers since '07
- Jun 17, 2021BrickellBayside
Not really.
If he was hired for a single shoot, and compensated for the shoot, that doesn't inherently mean you can use the other photos and outtakes for profit.
It’s common practice for a photographer to sell prints of HIS photos that he has OWNERSHIP of.
