this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2025
214 points (89.3% liked)

Not The Onion

14786 readers
4041 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 weeks ago

"The lawsuit alleges that Zlozower and his reps reached out to Ozzy about the photos multiple times last year, but never received a response. "

Odds are Ozzy doesn't know why he just entered a room never mind why some guy is sending a notice about some photos.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago

Funniest thing I ever saw on "reality" TV was the food fight the Osbournes had with their noisy neighbors in the middle of the night

[–] [email protected] 30 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I get the reasoning behind the photographer having the rights to photos, but it just doesn't sit right that the human subject of those photos has no rights at all.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think the subject does have some rights though. I'm not a fancy law talking guy, but I'm pretty sure you can sue someone for using your likeness without permission. But it's a bit dependent on the circumstances, a famous person can't sue a paparazzi for taking their photo in a public place, but I think they can when there's an expectation of privacy. You see people's face blurred on TV shows unless they sign a waiver. If been walking around where they're shooting a movie they put up signs letting you know that's happening and warning that you might potentially be in the background of a shot.

It's just there's more laws protecting the the people using the camera since big companies will use any loopholes to screw them out of money.

Though in this case I think the photographer is being an asshole. If Ozzy was using the photos for an album cover which he'd make a lot of money from, then the photographer deserves to get paid. But if he's just posting some old photos of himself with his friends, then the photographer needs to chill.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Bruh I'm a nobody and even i make sure to get permission from photographers to post their photos of me. lol

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

There is a difference between you going to a photographer asking him to take photos of you and a paparazzi taking a photo of you in a public setting.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago

You're being obtuse. You're talking about a hired photographer and arguably one of the most famous hired rock photographers of all time, he did their tour and album covers you incredible bafoon.

load more comments
view more: next ›