New York court rules website didn't violate image copyright by embedding Instagram post

[editor]

Interesting case this. In summary: don't post up pics with a commercial value on Instagram.

Mashable contacted Sinclair in March 2016 and offered to pay $50 to license one of her images for use in its article on female photographers. Sinclair declined the offer, so Mashable instead embedded an Instagram post of the image that Sinclair had published on her public Instagram account.

Fast-forward to January 2018 when, according to the court documents, Sinclair contacted Mashable and demanded that they remove the embedded post from the article on the grounds of copyright infringement. Mashable refused to remove the Instagram post and 10 days later, Sinclair filed a copyright lawsuit against the publication and its parent company Ziff Davis, LLC.

The lawsuit raised questions over Instagram's Terms of Service, its right to grant sublicenses for images uploaded to its platform, and whether sharing and embedding public social media posts without permission or a direct image license constitutes copyright infringement.

New York court rules website didn't violate image copyright by embedding Instagram post

The latest legal ruling follows a similar case from 2018 about a tweet that featured a copyrighted image of Tom Brady.

www.dpreview.com