"Leaking" Set Photos

[CaseM]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

I assume this could only fall under copyright, but this is kind of an odd question.

If I have set photos from a big budget film and I post them online, could I face legal action at the hands of the studio? (Note: I do not work on the set, nor do I have any affiliation with the studio. A friend of mine found these pictures from somebody who does work on set that he met online.)

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

I assume this could only fall under copyright, but this is kind of an odd question.

If I have set photos from a big budget film and I post them online, could I face legal action at the hands of the studio? (Note: I do not work on the set, nor do I have any affiliation with the studio. A friend of mine found these pictures from somebody who does work on set that he met online.)

They're not your pictures.

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

I assume this could only fall under copyright, but this is kind of an odd question.

If I have set photos from a big budget film and I post them online, could I face legal action at the hands of the studio? (Note: I do not work on the set, nor do I have any affiliation with the studio. A friend of mine found these pictures from somebody who does work on set that he met online.)

Yes, the studio could file a legal action against you if you publish photos from a film that is either still in development or not yet released and/or if these photos were taken without authorization and/or if you are not the copyright holder (e.g., the photographer who took the photos).

Damages awarded could potentially be high if what is shown in the photos affects the value of the film (for example, if a photo shows that a character in the film once thought dead in a previous film is shown in the photos as being alive) and/or if the photos that were found have been registered with the Copyright Office - posting the photos online would violate the copyright holder's exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute the images. Statutory damages on registered works range from $750 to $150,000 per infringed work.

 

[xylene]

found from is an odd turn of phrase... Odd in how many levels of 'not yours' these are and what a bad ideas this is and yet your are still asking about it.

 

[quincy]

The person who took the photos was probably prohibited from doing so. Most who work on movie sets must sign non-disclosure agreements. If the photographer took photos in breach of any agreement, he will probably be found out - and the loss of his job will not be his only worry.

If you were given photos either to confuse a trail back to the photographer, or because the photos were stolen by your friend and passed on to you to publish absent knowledge and consent from the photographer, all involved in the taking and the publishing of the photos could face legal actions.

Profits generated from the selling or publishing of unauthorized film photos generally will not be enough to support the very high costs of defending against (and losing) a lawsuit filed by a film studio or by one of the actors in the film (e.g., when the photos are nude photos taken from a scene in a film, an invasion of privacy or publicity rights suit can result).

It is a real risk, in other words, to use the photos you apparently now have in your possession.

I agree with xylene that the "found these pictures from" is very odd phrasing.