Dispute over Ground Zero photos

There was an interesting article in my local paper this morning. You can read it here.

Basically, a NYC detective took hundreds of images of Ground Zero in the days after September 11th. These pictures appeared in several books. Now the city of New York is suing him for the profits stating that he was on duty when the photographs were taken.

This will be an interesting case; not a 'slam dunk' for either side according to the article.

I am not a lawyer but my first impression was that the city has a better case. If the pictures were taken during a time that Botte was being paid by the city, the city does own the photos. On the other hand, these guys worked for very long hours during the cleanup. I'm sure he wasn't paid for 24 hours a day. In that case, any pictures he took on his time would be his.

This will interesting to watch.

Quite possibly the most petty act i've ever heard of. I sincerely hope he wins.

According to the article he retired on disability from lung disease acquired at ground zero. Although I see the city's point, I agree that it is indeed being petty, considering that this man gave his health up for the job. I wonder if he is being adequately paid for that?

part of me says anyone who keeps the full profit from the scenes of horror and destruction of that day, are in the wrong.

I think the question will be whether or not his job description included taking photographs for the city. If not, I don't see where the city could make a claim to the profits. They could fire him, but I'm not sure about the money...

If he was on salary, he was gettin' paid 24/7...

Re-reading the article, I think the guy should bill the city for his time and processing. Charge them dearly.

I think the biggest catch will be that hHe was "encouraged" to take photos by Kerik, but was told that it must be done at his own expense. If it was official, the NYPD should've been paying for everything. To me, the fact that it was clear that everything be done at his expense suggests that it was not official police business at all.

Kerik made charitable donations because he used the photos. If anything, Botte should have to match those donations...

I work for the government - anything that I do on company time is considered government property. Petty, yes, but it is in the rules.

Stacie

Of course there is the ownership of the pictures, and then there is design and layout of the book(s). If he helped with that then he would still be entitled to some of the royalties. But I agree with Stacie...on government / company time. It is theirs. Almost every company I have worked for has that policy.

That may be true, but in this particular case, it's still very petty and mean of the city to pursue this. They could opt not to do so without necessarily setting a precedent.

Mark

If he was told go ahead then the city should sue his boss! Anyway looks like the city will spend more in court costs then collect in royalties.

RTMiller wrote:
There was an interesting article in my local paper this morning. You can read it here.

On the other hand, these guys worked for very long hours during the cleanup. I'm sure he wasn't paid for 24 hours a day. In that case, any pictures he took on his time would be his.

This will interesting to watch.

I think the city owns the photos. If the person was not a detective, he would not have been their "after" working hours or had even been allowed where he was "after" hours.

This isn't "work for hire," so they don't own the photos. He was not being paid to take photos. At best, they could have taken some sort of disciplinary action, but since he's now retired, it's a moot point. Someone likely has an axe to grind with him, and we're not getting the full story. He may have a lawsuit against the city for the resulting incapacity and they may be using it as leverage to get him to drop it. There's definitely some missing information somewhere.

I suspect you may be close to the truth there.

Given the sort of muck that came out of those towers (asbestos etc) there will be a hell of a lot of claims being made and they'll try anything to get out of paying.

Thank you liza and GSH for seeing my point (whether or not you noticed it in my comment). The photographer will quite possibly die from the dust he inhaled at ground zero (others already have but I don't have time to find links right now), so quibbling over money seems niggardly on the part of the city.

The city has no responsibility to fell sorry for the guy to the extent of letting him keep the photos.

His boss, Bernard Kerik, "encouraged" him to take the photos. I know when my boss "encourages" me to do something, I tend to do it in the interests of job security.

I think this is going to hinge on the fact that the detective used 100% of his own resources in developing the pictures...