You have used my photograph without permission, inappropriately and are misrepresenting the photograph described in the article. You are also in violation of copyright laws. I expect an apology and the photograph to be removed...

Mr. Renaldi,

This is a news blog, and the photograph is relevant to the story being reported. Use of the photo in this case is fair use. As an artist you'd think you had heard of that before, or were you too busy poking your lens into the mouth of every gift-horse that brought you free publicity?

Further, you may have also missed out on the conclusion of Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation where the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that thumbnails of copyrighted works do not violate copyright, and are protected under fair use.

...Unless, of course, you can prove that by publishing said thumbnail, the value of your work is greatly tarnished, and why would you want to admit that your success as a photographer is as fragile as your feelings. will a low-res thumbnail really bring you down? If so, then stop letting post-closet celebrities, involved in high-profile divorces, buy, hang, and unhang your pictures. Risk is it may end up in the news.

Luckily for you, section 512(f) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act makes it unlawful to use DMCA takedown threats when the copyright holder knows that infringement has not actually occurred. Since your ignorant of how copyright works, you can't be held responsible for any subsequent idiocy.

Ha Ha Ha! What an ass that Renaldi guy is... great rebuttal to his claim by the way, just goes to show you that it's important to be aware of all your rights under the law.

Copyright law, what a stupid idea... when I'm President that will be the first thing to go... ok, maybe second after I mandate acceptance of gay marriage.

FieldMedic

Anyhoo, back to McGreevy. I always thought him an classless asshole. He hid his sexuality until he was threatned with being outed, lied to the public, himself and worse of all his wife. I have no sympathy for him or people like him. I pity him.

I have absolutely no sympathy for McGreevy. He is an embarrassment to every gay/lesibian/bi/trans that had the courage to come out and speak out for themselves. I hope his wife takes him down. We should not reward and idolize this man for his behavior and lack of courage.

Ben,
You are certainly right about fair use and copyright pertaining to the news. This is sadly a newsworthy event - though perhaps Alberto Gonzalez should have been on the cover of the post this Sunday rather than the photograph of my partner Seth. Have you taken the time to research the series from which this photograph was drawn or any of my work for that matter? Did it matter to you that when the photograph of Seth was sold to Jim's partner Mark - Jim was not yet a part of his life or that Mark has been very invloved in raising funds for the fight against HIV and an avid supporter of the arts. Did it matter to you that when you sensationalized my photograph that I never asked to be brought into a nasty divorce in the public eye? I also wonder if you as an openly gay person how could you not defend the naked male body - something that is beautiful and inspiring to a large percentage of the human race? Have you been to a nude beach or museum? I have never been involved in any publicity like this - only the wonderful support from friends and family and fans of my work when my book came out last year and this weekend I have learned how there is a nasty and dark side to putting your work out there. It makes me a bit sad...

I find it pathetic that Ben retreats into the safety net of fair use and copyright laws as a way to defend hiw own sensationalizing of this story. As Renaldi said in his post, it seems like Ben hasn't really done his research, and is as guilty as The Post when it comes to tabloid muck. What a putz.

I adore that photo. The ones I've seen from the series (in a magazine I think) were all really nice. Tender and touching.
But I don't understand why the artist is getting cranky about the use of his photo in this article. The author isn't casting any judgement on the piece itself, nor the artist. If anything, the exhibition of the piece may draw new people to view the artist's work.
Well, that's my opinion anyway. Hopefully, the art will get to hang somewhere nice.