Iron Man Let The Lawsuits Begin!

Kirk Langstrom

FRANCINE!!!!
Joined
Apr 30, 2000
Messages
20,832
Reaction score
499
Points
88
A Los Angeles photographer claims the makers of movie Iron Man illegally used one of his photos in the summer blockbuster as part of a mock newspaper front page.



Freelance photographer Ronnie Adams, who shoots for the JFX paparazzi agency, filed a lawsuit last week in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California.



The suit accuses Marvel and Paramount, the studios that produced and distributed Iron Man, of unlawfully infringing Adams's copyright and engaging in unfair competition.



Adams claims the infringement occurred after Paramount Pictures managed to briefly shut down a Web site where he had posted the photo. The scene with the mock newspaper was later featured in a publicity still distributed by Paramount.



According to the suit, Adams shot a series of photos from a parking structure with a view of the Iron Man set in May 2007. He shot several photos of the Iron Man costume seen through a chain-link fence.



Adams sent the photos to a Web site run by a friend, the movie news site IESB. net, where they appeared in a photo gallery with prominent watermarks. Adams believes that this is the only place the infringe photo was published prior to the infringement.



Paramount contacted the Web site the same day and asked that the photograph be removed. The movie studio eventually persuaded the site's hosting company to take the site offline for 16 hours, Adams's lawsuit says. Later, Parmount told the site operator it had erred in insisting the photo be taken down, and proposed compensation for the site's downtime, though no agreement was reached, according to the lawsuit.



A year later, the picture showed up on the front page of a newspaper used as a prop in the Iron Man movie and in a publicity photo.



The photo appears in a scene in which the lead character, Tony Stark, played by Robert Downey Jr., reads a newspaper front page that says "Who is the Iron Man?" The photo on the front of the newspaper is nearly identical to the one Adams claims is his, with the only obvious difference being the missing watermark

The suit seeks unspecified monetary damages, as well as an order stopping Paramount and Marvel from using the picture in the DVD release of the movie, in advertising and in any video game.



A Paramount spokesperson did not immediately return a message seeking comment. Marvel's P.R. firm referred a call back to the company, where a person in the legal department said the company could not comment on legal matters.

imlawsuit3.jpg
 
Ronnie need to shut da hell up and be glad that his picture was use in the movie. What if they pay hm or something then what he going to do?
 
The photo doesn't belong to him. They had every right to use it.
 
Of all the inane things one could expect to spawn from this film. :down
 
ROFLOL...this case is going to be tossed...nothing else to say about it.
 
Sounds like a tool who wants his 15 minutes and a cut of the movie's huge take.
 
If he didn't get the image copyrighted, then it does not matter. He'll need proof that he copyrighted it before the movie came out.
A watermark is not the same thing, and it was IESB's watermark anyway. He's not going to win.
 
It's the property of IESB.net.

IESB were glad to have their photo used in the flick, now they have to step up saying that Marvel used the photos from them.
 
ROFLOL...this case is going to be tossed...nothing else to say about it.


I wish that were true.

This day and age...it seems like all the greedy losers and scumbags seem to be unjustly winning the cases.

This just sickens me...I have so much hatred towards the paparazzi. How they go around stalking celebrities and looking for anything to try and ruin them. This bastard sneaks a shot and is now trying to sue because they used it in the film.:cmad:
 
I don't see how his picture of IM can be copyrighted by him, since the character doesn't belong to him anyway. I do hope the judge will toss this case out before the grand jury.
 
i wonder if IESB.net or his friend got a "thank you" in the movie credits.
 
:lmao:

This guy is the photographer so they could have given him credit, but he's also a paparazzo and those guys are losers so...yeah. :oldrazz:
 
This man fails at epic proportions.

"I'm suing you for using my uncopyrighted picture of your copyrighted character."

Moron. I'd love to actually watch this hearing. This is something of Judge Judy caliber.
 
A little late, but this guy sounds like a ******.
 
I don't know what specific rules or laws are in effect in this case, but the whole "uncopyrighted" bit doesn't seem accurate to me.
A photographer automatically retains copyright to any photos he's taken, unless he's an working for a company the photos are specifically taken for... which doesn't seem to be the case.

Right off the bat, he could possibly have a case.
 
You'd think, wouldnt you.

Unfortunately, the guy is obviously just trying to make what he percieves as an easy buck.

It'd be nice if makers of the chain-link fence could file a suit against this tool for taking a photo of their property without permission or something.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"