Copyright Alliance
Join Now
Login
  • about
    • Who We Are
    • Who We Represent
    • Leadership
    • Boards
    • Contact Us
  • issues & policy
    • Statements to Congress
    • Agency and other Filings
    • Amicus Briefs
    • Position Papers
    • Copyright Subject Matter Search
  • copyright law
    • Copyright Act
    • Copyright Regulations
    • Copyright Office Compendium
    • Copyright Cases
    • Copyright Legislation
    • Government Reports
    • Congressional Hearings
    • International Agreements
  • resources
    • Find a Copyright Attorney
    • Creator Services
    • Creator Assistance Directory
    • find a copyright owner
    • Research Papers
    • Copyright Facts by State
    • Classroom Resources
    • REPORT PIRACY
  • news & events
    • Blogs
    • Press Releases
    • Media Center
    • Trending Topics
    • Event Calendar
  • education
    • videos
    • FAQs
    • Ask The Alliance
    • Copyright Law Explained
    • copyright courses
  • get involved
    • Join the Alliance
    • Add Your Voice
    • Copyright Alliance Policy Alert
image

Brammer v. Violent Hues

  • Allen v. Cooper
  • BMG v. Cox
  • Brammer v. Violent Hues
  • BWP Media v. Polyvore
  • Bynum v. Texas A&M University Athletic Department
  • Capitol Records v. ReDigi
  • Disney v. VidAngel
  • Dr. Seuss Enterprises v. ComicMix
  • Fourth Estate v. Wall-Street.com
  • Fox News Network v. TVEyes
  • Georgia v. Public Resource Org
  • Green (EFF) v. DOJ
  • Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons
  • Lang Van v. VNG
  • Oracle v. Google
  • Perfect 10 v. Giganews
  • Rentmeester v. Nike
  • Rimini Street v. Oracle
  • SAS Institute v. World Programming Limited
  • Spanski v. Telewizja
  • UMG Recordings v. Kurbanov
  • University of Houston System v. Jim Olive Photography
  • Valancourt Books v. Temple
  • VHT v. Zillow

Photographer Russell Brammer sued Violent Hues Productions for copyright infringement after the company used a copy of Brammer’s photograph on a website promoting its film festival, without permission. In June 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, on a motion for summary judgment, found in favor of Violent Hues, stating that the use constituted fair use. Brammer appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, arguing that the district court made both legal and factual errors in granting the motion and applying the fair use factors.

On April 26, the Fourth Circuit reversed the district court decision. The court held that Violent Hues’ copying was not transformative because it made only minimal changes to Brammer’s photo’s context and content. It also held that the use was commercial; that Violent Hues’ claim of good faith does not aid its fair use defense; the district court erred in finding the published status of the photo weighed in favor of fair use; the third factor weighed against fair use because Violent Hues copied roughly half of the photo, and the portion taken constituted the “heart” of the work; and the taking would cause market harm.


Procedural History

Status: Fourth Circuit reversed and remanded.  (April 26, 2019)

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Decision (April 26, 2019)

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of VA (June 11, 2018)

Amicus Briefs

Copyright Alliance

National Press Photographers Association, American Society of Media Photographers, Graphic Artists Guild, and American Photographic Artists

Digital Media Licensing Association (DMLA)

Arts & Entertainment Advocacy Clinic at Scalia Law School

Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts

Digital Justice Foundation

Violent Hues Production, LCC


More Copyright Cases here.

copyright alliance

1331 h street nw, suite 701

washington, dc 20005

202-540-2243

copyrightalliance.org

join the alliance
Donate
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
contact us disclaimer privacy policy

© 2021 Copyright Alliance

COVID-19 Update: Resources from Creative Community to Ease Coronavirus Impact READ MORE
+