Swiss Photographer Sues Apple for Pilfering Her Eyeball

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Does Apple have some sort of weird Swiss fetish or something? First Apple ‘borrowed’ the look of the railway clock and presumingly paid heavily for the privilege and now eyeball artwork? This begs two questions: If this turns out to be an eye for an eye thing, will Apple pay through the nose and If they buy the rights, will they name it an iEye?:D

"Apple proceeded to copy, publish, and exploit Plaintiff's 'Eye Closeup' photograph, including in its MacBook Pro advertising campaign, keynote address, and related advertising materials without permission or compensation."
Click to expand...
 
So, 1 count of infringement for every person that Apple showed this advertisement to, right? If she gets the RIAA lawyers to draw up the damages she should be able to walk away as the new owner of Apple.
 
The photographer should sue for the theft of "look and feel" of her eyeball. It's gotta be worth $800 million or so.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Time to pay up! I hate art pilfering.
Click to expand...

Is it still okay to pilfer snacks? Or does that fall under plundering?

What's with Apple not being able to make their own art? I could understand a small company with only a few employees doing something like that because they don't know better, but they could just buy someone's art along with their soul if they wanted. It was probably some graphic designer trying to make a deadline and not thinking about the repercussions or about ever getting caught.
 
SkribbelKat said:
Is it still okay to pilfer snacks? Or does that fall under plundering?

What's with Apple not being able to make their own art? I could understand a small company with only a few employees doing something like that because they don't know better, but they could just buy someone's art along with their soul if they wanted. It was probably some graphic designer trying to make a deadline and not thinking about the repercussions or about ever getting caught.
Click to expand...

Pilfer vs. plunder is about scope. If you plunder snacks, you're doing it by the pallet.

No designer would actively steal from another artist and expect to keep working in the industry.
 
I'm sure Apple already has a patent on "eyeball artwork", so she actually needs to pay Apple royalties :)
 
It seems that, for the last few years, Apple has been suffering from a severe lack of moral compass. The current mentality there seems to be "What's mine is mine, and what's your's is negotiable" It looks pretty stupid to be caught stealing twice in the same week, while spending millions suing others for "stealing"
 
sir-gold said:
It seems that, for the last few years, Apple has been suffering from a severe lack of moral compass. The current mentality there seems to be "What's mine is mine, and what's your's is negotiable" It looks pretty stupid to be caught stealing twice in the same week, while spending millions suing others for "stealing"
Click to expand...

This +1!!!
 
sir-gold said:
It seems that, for the last few years, Apple has been suffering from a severe lack of moral compass. The current mentality there seems to be "What's mine is mine, and what's your's is negotiable" It looks pretty stupid to be caught stealing twice in the same week, while spending millions suing others for "stealing"
Click to expand...

It makes you wonder how much Samsung is going after Apple via Alternate means (e.g. are they finding these issues and pointing them out to the affected parties). If they realized the courts are fucking them (Samsung) in the patent space...why not see if others can screw Apple on other fronts. Not all wars are fought on a single front.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Pilfer vs. plunder is about scope. If you plunder snacks, you're doing it by the pallet.

No designer would actively steal from another artist and expect to keep working in the industry.
Click to expand...

Oh, I get it. So if Apple was plundering, it'd need to steal like a couple barrels of eyeballs or something.
 
I'd be surprised if Apple as a company actively had a policy of stealing imagery for it's marketing, I think it's more likely that it was some stupid employee who was tasked with getting the graphics and just stole it without knowing any better.
 
Fixed....

pirate.jpg
 
Leiwald and her lawyers, however, are putting the screws to Apple, big-time: the lawsuit seeks "defendant's profits" as related to the use of the shot, along with statutory damages, attorney's fees, and "any other gains, profits and advantages by defendants as a result of defendants' acts of infringment."
Click to expand...

She already called up the RIAA for their lawyers.
 
Tudz said:
I'd be surprised if Apple as a company actively had a policy of stealing imagery for it's marketing, I think it's more likely that it was some stupid employee who was tasked with getting the graphics and just stole it without knowing any better.
Click to expand...

Maybe they're following the doctrine of the almighty Steve Jobs.
"Good artists copy. Great artists steal."
 
sir-gold said:
It seems that, for the last few years, Apple has been suffering from a severe lack of moral compass. The current mentality there seems to be "What's mine is mine, and what's your's is negotiable" It looks pretty stupid to be caught stealing twice in the same week, while spending millions suing others for "stealing"
Click to expand...

Um, apple has always done this, take other people's works and claim it as their own "innovation"
 
Heck, Apple will just counter sue and claim that they have trademarked every word that starts with "i" and anything that sounds like "i". Disney Pictures is next for their Pirates of the Caribbean.

"Aye Aye Cap'n!"
 
w4ffles said:
Maybe they're following the doctrine of the almighty Steve Jobs.
"Good artists copy. Great artists steal."
Click to expand...

Yeah, copying/stealing concepts and ideas, but blatantly stealing an image for no real reason sounds more like a clerical error than intentional. If they wanted some free artsy fartsy images... well... they're Apple, I'm sure they could just hold a random photo contest and give out a free adapter cable as the prize and recieve thousands of images for free to choose from :p
 
MrGuvernment said:
Um, apple has always done this, take other people's works and claim it as their own "innovation"
Click to expand...

Claiming "innovation" isn't as problematic as it it only interpreted as "invention" by the general public but actually means getting an invention into widespread use.
e.g. the Xerox team invented/developed the mouse/window user interface, microsoft/apple "innovated" computing by getting such products on the market after getting a tour of the Xerox research center.
 
If it's anything like the Swiss Railway clock settlement, they got a big chunk of change in damages, and an annual license agreement for their copyrighted material being used.
 
I'm not sure if she's playing it right. She wants a jury trial. Apple's lawyers are ruthless and will flatten her. She should have made a settlement or demand license fee payment and be compensated for loss fees while the photograph was used. With a jury trial, she stands a chance of losing it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top