Photographer getting sued by the color run!

So apparently the color run is suing a photographer because their trademark is in his images for the color run. He is suing back because they used his images for commercial advertizing purposes without his permission. He apparently only gave permission to post his images on their facebook page.

Here is the story: http://fstoppers.com …or-compensation-for-image

What do you guys think of the matter?

I actually attended one of the runs in Miami and hope my images aren't being used without my consent.
---------------
Edit:

There seems to be an agreement made! I can't wait to hear more about it.

http://www.gofundme.co​m/thecolorrunsuedme

The full facts aren't out here. This photog had worked for a company hired by Color Run. Was he working for them when he shot these pics? If so, what does that company's contract say about images of the run shot by their employees? And like several folks mentioned in the comments, does the photog have a release from the girl in the picture?

Lots of sticky issues here. It will be interesting to see how it turns out.

Here is the court filings: https://www.pacermonit​or.com …/Color_Run,_The​_v_Jackson

I don't think he was working for them during the time of the photo.

And a release form for the girl would be probably have been in the color runs contract when the runner signed up to run in the event. I don't think he would need one from her unless he did commercial advertising himself. He just posted the pics on his facebook. But that shouldn't be an issue unless she was to sue him over the image right?

You're right, I misread that. Looks like he worked for them after the pics were shot.

If all he did with the pics was post them on FB, then no, he wouldn't need a release. And if Color Run's agreement with runners states their likeness can be used, then they need no further release. But if this guy is selling pics he took to Color Run, which would be the case if they agree to compensate him, then I believe he needs a release from her. But I'm not a lawyer and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so....

They used the pic without permission. They basically admit that in their court filings.

Them counter suing him is beyond douchey.

SeanWebster wrote in post #16690372
And a release form for the girl would be probably have been in the color runs contract when the runner signed up to run in the event.

except the release would have been so the organisers could publish shots. I know the company I work for had some sponsorship deal with the New Zealand Color-run event and they had a staff photo competition where anyone taking part had to basicly give away full rights to any shots taken.

Would have been a great event, but I wouldn't want to give away all rights (and have various companies use the shots commercially for free...) so I didn't attend.

This might be where Max gets shafted. Depending on the agreement between Color Run and Max's school, they may very well have rights to his photographs.If he was there on his own volition and not as a student with his class that was granted non commercial access (that probably had a whole bunch of stipulations) things would be very different.

Never heard of a Color Run before. What a good way to get that color stuff onto and into your gear. No thanks.

the flying moose wrote in post #16691275
Never heard of a Color Run before. What a good way to get that color stuff onto and into your gear. No thanks.

I saw an article that covered that (link here). It can really mess with your gear badly. We had a Holi festival here at the university (similar colored powder) and I bought a full raincoat setup for my gear to shoot that. But then due to weather it got rescheduled for a day I was gone. You really need to have some sort of protection for your gear if you're going to shoot around that powder.

Ghost240sx wrote in post #16691267
This might be where Max gets shafted. Depending on the agreement between Color Run and Max's school, they may very well have rights to his photographs.If he was there on his own volition and not as a student with his class that was granted non commercial access (that probably had a whole bunch of stipulations) things would be very different.

The school can't sign away Max's copyright. If The Color Run had a contract that Max had signed giving them permission to use the image, they would have published it in their response yesterday rather than whining about Max's stupid demands.

If you photograph a color run event they, in their information state they have rights to your images. You photograph their event, they have your image if they see it and want it. If you don't like those rules don't shoot. (It's somewhere in their website).

On another note, who would take their camera or lens to that? I think borrow lenses posted an article on the damage jt causes.

M_Six wrote in post #16691312
I saw an article that covered that (link here). It can really mess with your gear badly. We had a Holi festival here at the university (similar colored powder) and I bought a full raincoat setup for my gear to shoot that. But then due to weather it got rescheduled for a day I was gone. Your really need to have some sort of protection for your gear if you're going to shoot around that powder.

That's gross. Imagine what it does to your lungs?

stillinamerica wrote in post #16692236
If you photograph a color run event they, in their information state they have rights to your images. You photograph their event, they have your image if they see it and want it. If you don't like those rules don't shoot. (It's somewhere in their website).

On another note, who would take their camera or lens to that? I think borrow lenses posted an article on the damage jt causes.

Are color runs completely closed? That is, are they ticketed or passed to get near the track? I doubt the photog had this kind of agreement (again, the school can't agree to that for him). The Color Run can say a lot anything they want, doesn't mean it will pan out in court.

Really interested in this one.

Thomas Campbell wrote in post #16690462
They used the pic without permission. They basically admit that in their court filings.

Them counter suing him is beyond douchey.

Standard business practice. Someone sues you and you threaten to counter sue, for made up offence, in an attempt to scare them off.

stillinamerica wrote in post #16692236
If you photograph a color run event they, in their information state they have rights to your images. You photograph their event, they have your image if they see it and want it. If you don't like those rules don't shoot. (It's somewhere in their website).

On another note, who would take their camera or lens to that? I think borrow lenses posted an article on the damage jt causes.

Having it on their website does not make it an enforceable contract.

MattPharmD wrote in post #16692428
Are color runs completely closed? That is, are they ticketed or passed to get near the track? I doubt the photog had this kind of agreement (again, the school can't agree to that for him). The Color Run can say a lot anything they want, doesn't mean it will pan out in court.

Really interested in this one.

Doubt it. I think they encourage friends and family to cheer on the runners before their lungs collapse due to paint inhalation.

Dan Marchant wrote in post #16692599
Standard business practice. Someone sues you and you threaten to counter sue, for made up offence, in an attempt to scare them off.

In England, if you file a frivolous suit and a judge throws it out, you are ordered to pay the defendant's fees associated with it.

Unsuprisingly, they don't have as litigious a society as us.

By posting below me, you agree to become my unpaid lighting and gear carrying assistant for life: