American actress, Jennifer Lopez, also known by her nickname J.Lo, has been hit with a $150,000 lawsuit by the Splash News and Picture Agency for copyright infringement over a photo of herself and fiancé Alex Rodriguez found on Instagram. She allegedly posted the photo on her official Instagram page two years ago.

The lawsuit filed in US District Court for the Central District of California on Saturday, claims that J.Lo did not have permission to post the agency’s image, which showed her holding hands with her fiancé, A-Rod, in 2017 during breakfast in New York City.

The photographer alleges that J.Lo’s own photo belongs to their company.

“Nevertheless, Lopez used it without authorization or permission from [Splash] to do so,” the lawsuit states.


What do you guys say about this kind thing?

Read details through the link

https://www.mazechmedia.com/2019/10/jennifer-lopez-sued-for-posting-a-photo-of-herself-and-her-fiance-on-instagram-two-years-ago/

150k is small lol! They should sue her for 150m!

I dont know if I understand this 1

javaguru:
I dont know if I understand this 1

What they are saying is that according to 'a controversial law', when someone sees you and takes a photo of you using his camera or phone, that photo belongs to the photographer, not you. So you do not have any right to share the photo even though it shows your face. .

My question: But, why should somebody even take a photo of me......even when I don't want dem to snaaaap me


I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT KIND OF LAW!

J. Lo should file a counter lawsuit of $300,000 for right infringement. How can someone or an organization sue me for posting my own picture?? When there's too much law, rubbish go dey enter am

Nawaaoh:




What they are saying is that according to 'a controversial law', when someone sees you and takes a photo of you using his camera or phone, that photo belongs to the photographer, not you. So you do not have any right to share the photo even though it shows your face. .

My question: But, why should somebody even take a photo of me......even when I don't want dem to snaaaap me


I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT KIND OF LAW!

That's is the western world for you.

Can I be her attorney?

She should file a counter suit for being photographed without her permission.

I would buy it if it wasn't a pic of her.
Not when the picture is hers.

That's not quite it! Someone is trying to create such a "controversial law" that does not yet exist, that photo images of you belong to the photo image maker and not you.

Nawaaoh:


What they are saying is that according to 'a controversial law', when someone sees you and takes a photo of you using his camera or phone, that photo belongs to the photographer, not you. So you do not have any right to share the photo even though it shows your face. .

My question: But, why should somebody even take a photo of me......even when I don't want dem to snaaaap me


I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT KIND OF LAW!

That's small money for her nah

Dem

Nawaaoh:




What they are saying is that according to 'a controversial law', when someone sees you and takes a photo of you using his camera or phone, that photo belongs to the photographer, not you. So you do not have any right to share the photo even though it shows your face. .

My question: But, why should somebody even take a photo of me......even when I don't want dem to snaaaap me


I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT KIND OF LAW!

I have heard about this kind of laws but in football, they say pictures taken by Getty images that players don't have the right to share it without permission.
me I come say what kind of weird law where I no beg you to snap me for pitch with all my sweating there and I no fit use am again without your permission, oyibo make laws to protect big,small,poor and rich thats what I figured