National Press Photographers Association: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Fix opening line + remove links to NPPA site at Wayback Machine
inappropriate category
 
(45 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Infobox company
{{Refimprove|date=March 2012}}
|logo = Logo of the National Press Photographers Association.png
The '''National Press Photographers Association''' ('''NPPA''') was founded in 1947. The organization is based in [[Durham, North Carolina]] and is mostly made up of [[still photographers]], television [[videographers]], [[Editing|editors]], and students in the [[journalism]] field. The NPPA places emphasis on [[photojournalism]], or journalism that presents a story through the use of [[photograph]]s or moving pictures. The NPPA holds annual competitions as well as several quarterly contests, seminars, and workshops designed to stimulate personal growth in its members. It utilizes a mentor program which offers its members the opportunity to establish a relationship with a veteran NPPA member and learn from them. The organization also offers a [[critique]] service, a job bank, an online discussion board, and various member benefits.
|name = National Press Photographers Association
|trade_name = NPPA (1946-present)
|foundation = 1946<br>[[United States]]
|location = [[Athens, Georgia|Athens]], [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], [[United States]]
|homepage = [https://nppa.org/ nppa.org]
}}
The '''National Press Photographers Association''' ('''NPPA''') is an American [[professional association]] made up of [[still photographers]], television [[videographers]], [[Editing|editors]], and students in the [[journalism]] field. Founded in 1946, the organization is based in at the Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Georgia. The NPPA places emphasis on [[photojournalism]], or journalism that presents a story through the use of [[photograph]]s or moving pictures. The NPPA holds annual competitions as well as several quarterly contests, seminars, and workshops designed to stimulate personal growth in its members. It utilizes a mentor program which offers its members the opportunity to establish a relationship with a veteran NPPA member and learn from them. The organization also offers a [[critique]] service, a job bank, an online discussion board, and various member benefits.


Their members include still and [[videographer|television photographers]], [[Editing|editors]], [[students]] and representatives of businesses that serve the photojournalism industry. {{As of | 2017}}, NPPA had total membership at just over 6,000.
==Mission statement==


Members of NPPA abide by a strict code of ethics.<ref name="NPPA Code of Ethics Online">{{cite web|title=NPPA Code of Ethics|url=https://nppa.org/code_of_ethics|publisher=National Press Photographers Association|access-date=4 Jul 2015}}</ref>
The National Press Photographers Association is dedicated to the advancement of [[photojournalism]], its creation, [[editing]] and [[distribution (business)|distribution]], in all [[news media]]. NPPA encourages photojournalists to reflect high standards of quality in their professional performance and in their personal [[Ethical code|code of ethics]]. NPPA vigorously promotes [[freedom of the press]] in all its forms. To this end, NPPA provides continuing educational programs and [[fraternalism]] without bias, as we support and acknowledge the best the profession has to offer.

Their members include still and [[television photographers]], [[Editing|editors]], [[students]] and representatives of businesses that serve the photojournalism industry. {{As of | 2003}}, NPPA had over 8,000 paid professional members, about 1,500 paid student members, and nearly 500 life members—bringing the total membership to just over 10,000.

==Code of Ethics==

Members of NPPA abide by a strict code of ethics:

<blockquote>

===Preamble===

The National Press Photographers Association, a [[professional society]] that promotes the highest standards in photojournalism, acknowledges concern for every person's need both to be fully informed about public events and to be recognized as part of the world in which we live.

Photojournalists operate as trustees of the public. Our primary role is to report visually on the significant events and on the varied viewpoints in our common world. Our primary goal is the faithful and comprehensive depiction of the subject at hand. As photojournalists, we have the responsibility to document society and to preserve its history through images.

Photographic and video images can reveal great truths, expose wrongdoing and neglect, inspire hope and understanding and connect people around the globe through the language of visual understanding. Photographs can also cause great harm if they are callously intrusive or are manipulated.

This code is intended to promote the highest quality in all forms of photojournalism and to strengthen public confidence in the profession. It is also meant to serve as an educational tool both for those who practice and for those who appreciate photojournalism. To that end, The National Press Photographers Association sets forth the following Code of Ethics:

===Code of Ethics===
{{Peacock|date=March 2012}}
Photojournalists and those who manage visual news productions are accountable for upholding the following standards in their daily work:

#Be accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects.
#Resist being manipulated by staged photo opportunities.
#Be complete and provide context when photographing or recording subjects. Avoid stereotyping individuals and groups. Recognize and work to avoid presenting one's own biases in the work.
#Treat all subjects with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable subjects and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy. Intrude on private moments of grief only when the public has an overriding and justifiable need to see.
#While photographing subjects do not intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence events.
#Editing should maintain the integrity of the photographic images' content and context. Do not manipulate images or add or alter sound in any way that can mislead viewers or misrepresent subjects.
#Do not pay sources or subjects or reward them materially for information or participation.
#Do not accept gifts, favors, or compensation from those who might seek to influence coverage.
#Do not intentionally sabotage the efforts of other journalists.
#Be accurate in your captions
Ideally, photojournalists should:
#Strive to ensure that the public's business is conducted in public. Defend the rights of access for all journalists.
#Think proactively, as a student of psychology, sociology, politics and art to develop a unique vision and presentation. Work with a voracious appetite for current events and contemporary visual media.
#Strive for total and unrestricted access to subjects, recommend alternatives to shallow or rushed opportunities, seek a diversity of viewpoints, and work to show unpopular or unnoticed points of view.
#Avoid political, civic and business involvements or other employment that compromise or give the appearance of compromising one's own journalistic independence.
#Strive to be unobtrusive and humble in dealing with subjects.
#Respect the integrity of the photographic moment.
#Strive by example and influence to maintain the spirit and high standards expressed in this code. When confronted with situations in which the proper action is not clear, seek the counsel of those who exhibit the highest standards of the profession. Photojournalists should continuously study their craft and the ethics that guide it.
</blockquote><ref name="NPPA Code of Ethics Online">{{cite web|title=NPPA Code of Ethics|url=https://nppa.org/code_of_ethics|publisher=National Press Photographers Association|accessdate=27 June 2012}}</ref>


==Incorporation==
==Incorporation==


NPPA was incorporated on October 3, 1947. The original certificate of incorporation outlined six key objectives.
NPPA was incorporated on October 3, 1947. The original certificate of incorporation outlined six key objectives.{{citation-needed|date=July 2015}}


#To advance press photography in all its branches
#To advance press photography in all its branches
Line 58: Line 23:
#To settle equitably and justify the differences between its members
#To settle equitably and justify the differences between its members
#To preserve, stabilize, unify, and coordinate all elements of the photographic press of the nation
#To preserve, stabilize, unify, and coordinate all elements of the photographic press of the nation

The NPPA is a [[501(c)(6) organization]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://nppa.org/sites/default/files/NPPA_501_C_6%20Certification.pdf|access-date=June 21, 2017|title=501(c)(6) certification letter|publisher=IRS}}</ref>


==Notable past members==
==Notable past members==
* [[James Atherton (photographer)|James Atherton]], veteran news photographer who caught iconic moments through a lens in Washington D.C. for over forty years
* [[Marion Carpenter]], first female National Press Photographer to cover Washington, D.C., the White House and travel with a U.S. President.
* [[Marion Carpenter]], first female National Press Photographer to cover Washington, D.C., the White House and travel with a U.S. President

==Advocacy==

In August of 2019 the National Press Photographers Association and the American Society of Media Photographers filed an amicus brief in support of Jim Olive in University of Houston System vs. Jim Olive Photography, D/B/A Photolive, Inc. The brief was joined by the [[North American Nature Photography Association]], [[Graphic Artists Guild]], American Photographic Artists, and [[Professional Photographers of America]]. "The case began when Texas photographer Jim Olive discovered that the University of Houston was using one of his aerial photographs for marketing purposes without permission. When Olive asked the University to pay for the use, they refused and told him they were shielded from suit because of sovereign immunity, which protects state government entities from many lawsuits."<ref>{{cite web |last1=Mickey Osterreicher |first1=Alicia Calzada |title=Texas Appellate Court holds that government piracy of copyrighted work is not a takings |url=https://nppa.org/news/texas-appellate-court-holds-government-piracy-copyrighted-work-not-takings |website=NPPA |date=13 June 2019 |publisher=National Press Photographers Association |access-date=18 November 2019}}</ref> After a negative ruling from a Texas appellate court Olive hopes to continue his fight.<ref>{{cite web |title=University of Houston System v. Jim Olive Photography |url=https://copyrightalliance.org/copyright-law/copyright-cases/university-of-houston-system-v-jim-olive-photography/ |website=Copyright Alliance |access-date=18 November 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Edwards |first1=Jenny |title=Fstoppers Interviews Jim Olive, the Texas Photographer Whose Copyrighted Image was Stolen by the University of Houston |url=https://fstoppers.com/originals/fstoppers-interviews-jim-olive-texas-photographer-whose-copyrighted-image-was-382353 |access-date=18 November 2019 |publisher=Fstoppers |date=18 June 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Sixel |first1=L.M. |title=Texas court says photographer has no recourse against university copyright infringement |url=https://www.chron.com/business/article/Texas-court-says-photographer-has-no-recourse-13973674.php |access-date=18 November 2019 |newspaper=Houston Chronicle |date=14 June 2019}}</ref>

In 2019 the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] granted certiorari in [[Allen v. Cooper]], raising the question of whether Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity via the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act ([[Copyright Remedy Clarification Act|CRCA]]) in providing remedies for authors of original expression whose federal copyrights are infringed by states.<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/allen-v-cooper/ |title = Allen v. Cooper}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=No. 18-877 |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-877.html |website=Supreme Court of the United States |publisher=Supreme Court of the United States |access-date=25 July 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Liptak |first1=Adam |title=Blackbeard's Ship Heads to Supreme Court in a Battle Over Another Sort of Piracy |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/02/us/politics/supreme-court-blackbeard-piracy.html |access-date=20 October 2019 |newspaper=New York Times |date=2 September 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |last1=Gardner |first1=Eriq |title=Supreme Court Wrestles With Consequences for Piracy by State Governments |url=https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/supreme-court-wrestles-consequences-piracy-by-state-governments-1252437 |access-date=16 November 2019 |magazine=Hollywood Reporter |date=5 November 2019}}</ref> In 2015, the state government of North Carolina uploaded videos of the wreck of the ''Queen Anne's Revenge'' to its website without permission. As a result [[Nautilus Productions]], the company documenting the recovery since 1998, filed suit in federal court over [[copyright]] violations and the passage of "[[Blackbeard's Law]]" by the North Carolina legislature.<ref>{{cite web |title=Allen v Cooper, et al. |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-877.html |website=Supreme Court of the United States |publisher=Supreme Court of the United States|access-date=22 June 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Gresko |first1=Jessica |title=High court will hear copyright dispute involving pirate ship |url=https://www.apnews.com/bc8c92c2c8b449158537c356a44cf757 |access-date=22 June 2019 |publisher=Associated Press |date=3 June 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Wolverton |first1=Paul |title=Pirate ship lawsuit from Fayetteville goes to Supreme Court on Tuesday |url=https://www.fayobserver.com/news/20191102/pirate-ship-lawsuit-from-fayetteville-goes-to-supreme-court-on-tuesday |access-date=2 November 2019 |publisher=Fayetteville Observer |date=2 November 2019}}</ref> Before posting the videos the North Carolina Legislature passed "Blackbeard's Law", N.C. Gen Stat §121-25(b), which stated, "All photographs, video recordings, or other documentary materials of a derelict vessel or shipwreck or its contents, relics, artifacts, or historic materials in the custody of any agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions shall be a public record pursuant to Chapter 132 of the General Statutes."<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/allen-v-cooper/ |title = Allen v. Cooper}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=No. 18-877 |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-877.html |website=Supreme Court of the United States |publisher=Supreme Court of the United States |access-date=25 July 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Liptak |first1=Adam |title=Blackbeard's Ship Heads to Supreme Court in a Battle Over Another Sort of Piracy |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/02/us/politics/supreme-court-blackbeard-piracy.html |access-date=20 October 2019 |work=New York Times |date=2 September 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Gardner |first1=Eriq |title=Supreme Court Wrestles With Consequences for Piracy by State Governments |url=https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/supreme-court-wrestles-consequences-piracy-by-state-governments-1252437 |access-date=16 November 2019 |publisher=Hollywood Reporter |date=5 November 2019}}</ref> Thirteen amici including; the [[United States Chamber of Commerce]], the [[Recording Industry Association of America]], the [[Copyright Alliance]], the [[Software and Information Industry Association]] and the National Press Photographers Association, filed briefs in support of Allen.<ref>{{cite web |title=Allen v. Cooper |url=https://copyrightalliance.org/copyright-law/copyright-cases/allen-v-cooper/ |website=Copyright Alliance |access-date=18 November 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=NPPA, ASMP asks SCOTUS for protection of copyright infringement by states |url=https://nppa.org/news/nppa-asmp-asks-scotus-protection-copyright-infringement-states |website=NPPA |date=13 August 2019 |access-date=18 November 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Allen v. Cooper |url=https://www.chamberlitigation.com/cases/allen-v-cooper |website=U.S. Chamber Litigation Center |date=9 August 2019 |access-date=18 November 2019}}</ref> Those briefs proposed various doctrines under which the CRCA could validly abrogate sovereign immunity and variously re-asserted and supported the reasons why Congress examined and enacted CRCA, claiming that Congress was fair in finding that states had abused immunity and that an alternative remedy was needed.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Kass |first1=Dani |title=Copyright Cavalry Supports Pirate Ship Photog At High Court |url=https://www.theusconstitution.org/news/copyright-cavalry-supports-pirate-ship-photog-at-high-court/ |website=Constitutional Accountability Center |access-date=17 November 2019}}</ref> On November 5, 2019 the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in ''Allen v. Cooper''.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Murphy |first1=Brian |title=How Blackbeard's ship and a diver with an 'iron hand' ended up at the Supreme Court |url=https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article237019034.html |access-date=16 November 2019 |publisher=Charlotte Observer |date=5 November 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Wolf |first1=Richard |title=Aarrr, matey! Supreme Court justices frown on state's public display of pirate ship's salvage operation |url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/05/legendary-pirate-blackbeards-shipwreck-sails-supreme-court/4166346002/ |access-date=27 December 2019 |publisher=USA Today |date=5 November 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Livni |first1=Ephrat |title=A Supreme Court piracy case involving Blackbeard proves truth is stranger than fiction |url=https://qz.com/1742690/scotus-piracy-case-involving-blackbeard-is-stranger-than-fiction/ |access-date=27 December 2019 |publisher=Quartz |date=5 November 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Woolverton |first1=Paul |title=Supreme Court justices skeptical in Blackbeard pirate ship case from Fayetteville |url=https://www.fayobserver.com/news/20191105/supreme-court-justices-skeptical-in-blackbeard-pirate-ship-case-from-fayetteville |access-date=27 December 2019 |publisher=Fayetteville Observer |date=5 November 2019}}</ref> On March 23, 2020, the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] issued an opinion in ''Allen v. Cooper'', holding that Congress had no Constitutional authority to abrogate state sovereign immunity via the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act. In other words, the CRCA is unconstitutional. Congress failed to provide evidence to support the need to abrogate sovereign immunity.

Following the ruling, Senators [[Thom Tillis]] (R-North Carolina) and [[Patrick Leahy]] (D-Vermont), of the intellectual property subcommittee on the Senate Judiciary Committee, sent letters to the U.S. Copyright Office and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office requesting a study detailing copyright infringements by state governments.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Gardner |first1=Eriq |title=Senators Ask U.S. Copyright, Patent Offices to Study Infringement by States |url=https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/senators-ask-us-copyright-patent-offices-study-infringement-by-states-1292382 |access-date=15 June 2020 |publisher=Hollywood Reporter |date=29 April 2020}}</ref> The United States Copyright Office gave intellectual property owners suffering infringement by state entities until August 3, 2020 to publicly comment as part of this inquiry.<ref>{{cite web |title=State Sovereign Immunity Study |url=https://www.copyright.gov/policy/state-sovereign-immunity/ |website=Copyright.gov |publisher=U.S. Copyright Office |access-date=15 June 2020}}</ref> In September of 2020 the U.S. Copyright Office began publishing those comments which reflect hundreds of copyright violations by state entities. <ref>{{cite web |title=Sovereign Immunity Study |url=https://beta.regulations.gov/document/COLC-2020-0009-0001/comment |website=Regulations.gov |access-date=15 October 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Madigan |first1=Kevin |title=Copyright Alliance Survey Reveals Growing Threat of State Infringement |url=https://copyrightalliance.org/ca_post/copyright-alliance-survey-reveals-growing-threat-of-state-infringement/ |website=Copyright Alliance |date=3 September 2020 |access-date=15 October 2020}}</ref>

As a result of the ruling Nautilus filed a motion for reconsideration in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.<ref>{{cite news |last1=McKlveen |first1=Gina |title=A North Carolina Filmmaker Continues to Challenge State Sovereign Immunity |url=https://ial.uk.com/a-north-carolina-filmmaker-continues-to-challenge-state-sovereign-immunity/ |access-date=24 March 2023 |publisher=Institute of Art & Law |date=28 October 2022}}</ref> On August 18, 2021 Judge [[Terrence Boyle]] granted the motion for reconsideration which North Carolina promptly appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.<ref>{{cite web |title=Reconsideration Granted |url=https://www.nautilusproductions.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Doc.118.Reconsideration-granted.pdf |website=Nautilus Productions |access-date=5 April 2023}}</ref> The 4th Circuit denied the state's motion on October 14, 2022.<ref>{{cite web |title=4th Circuit Recon |url=http://www.nautilusproductions.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/4th-Circuit-Recon.pdf |website=Nautilus Productions |access-date=5 April 2023}}</ref> Nautilus then filed their second amended complaint on February 8, 2023 alleging 5th and 14th Amendment violations of Nautilus' constitutional rights, additional copyright violations, and claiming that North Carolina's "Blackbeard's Law" represents a [[Bill of Attainder]].<ref>{{cite web |title=PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT |url=https://ipwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/134-main.pdf |website=IPWatchdog |publisher=IPWatchdog |access-date=24 March 2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Barnes |first1=Greg |title=Fayetteville’s Blackbeard shipwreck filmmaker fires back in new court case |url=https://www.cityviewnc.com/stories/fayettevilles-blackbeard-shipwreck-filmmaker-fires-back-in-new-court-case,29512 |access-date=24 March 2023 |publisher=CityView |date=14 February 2023}}</ref>

Eight years after the passage of Blackbeard's Law, on June 30, 2023, North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper signed a bill repealing the law.<ref>{{cite web |title=AN ACT TO MAKE VARIOUS CHANGES TO THE STATUTES GOVERNING THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE DEPARTMENT |url=https://www.ncleg.gov/Sessions/2023/Bills/House/PDF/H168v6.pdf |website=ncleg.gov |publisher=North Carolina |access-date=21 July 2023}}</ref>


== References ==
== References ==
Line 66: Line 46:


==External links==
==External links==
*{{official website|http://www.nppa.org/}}
*{{official website|https://nppa.org/}}
*[http://www.nppa.org/competitions/best-of-photojournalism Best of Photojournalism Annual Contest]
*[http://www.nppa.org/competitions/best-of-photojournalism Best of Photojournalism Annual Contest]

{{authority control}}


[[Category:Photojournalism organizations]]
[[Category:Photojournalism organizations]]
[[Category:American photography organizations]]
[[Category:American photography organizations]]
[[Category:American photojournalists|.]]
[[Category:Organizations based in Durham, North Carolina]]
[[Category:501(c)(6) nonprofit organizations]]
[[Category:Organizations established in 1946]]

Latest revision as of 22:34, 14 December 2023

National Press Photographers Association
NPPA (1946-present)
Founded1946
United States
HeadquartersAthens, Georgia, United States
Websitenppa.org

The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) is an American professional association made up of still photographers, television videographers, editors, and students in the journalism field. Founded in 1946, the organization is based in at the Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Georgia. The NPPA places emphasis on photojournalism, or journalism that presents a story through the use of photographs or moving pictures. The NPPA holds annual competitions as well as several quarterly contests, seminars, and workshops designed to stimulate personal growth in its members. It utilizes a mentor program which offers its members the opportunity to establish a relationship with a veteran NPPA member and learn from them. The organization also offers a critique service, a job bank, an online discussion board, and various member benefits.

Their members include still and television photographers, editors, students and representatives of businesses that serve the photojournalism industry. As of 2017, NPPA had total membership at just over 6,000.

Members of NPPA abide by a strict code of ethics.[1]

Incorporation[edit]

NPPA was incorporated on October 3, 1947. The original certificate of incorporation outlined six key objectives.[citation needed]

  1. To advance press photography in all its branches
  2. To promote the general welfare and conditions in the press photography field
  3. To create, promote, and maintain cordial relations and cooperation, a higher spirit of fraternalism, the interchange of thought and opinion freely, and a high standard of conduct among its members
  4. To distribute and disseminate accurate information in regard to matters pertaining to the photographic press of the nation
  5. To settle equitably and justify the differences between its members
  6. To preserve, stabilize, unify, and coordinate all elements of the photographic press of the nation

The NPPA is a 501(c)(6) organization.[2]

Notable past members[edit]

  • James Atherton, veteran news photographer who caught iconic moments through a lens in Washington D.C. for over forty years
  • Marion Carpenter, first female National Press Photographer to cover Washington, D.C., the White House and travel with a U.S. President

Advocacy[edit]

In August of 2019 the National Press Photographers Association and the American Society of Media Photographers filed an amicus brief in support of Jim Olive in University of Houston System vs. Jim Olive Photography, D/B/A Photolive, Inc. The brief was joined by the North American Nature Photography Association, Graphic Artists Guild, American Photographic Artists, and Professional Photographers of America. "The case began when Texas photographer Jim Olive discovered that the University of Houston was using one of his aerial photographs for marketing purposes without permission. When Olive asked the University to pay for the use, they refused and told him they were shielded from suit because of sovereign immunity, which protects state government entities from many lawsuits."[3] After a negative ruling from a Texas appellate court Olive hopes to continue his fight.[4][5][6]

In 2019 the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Allen v. Cooper, raising the question of whether Congress validly abrogated state sovereign immunity via the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act (CRCA) in providing remedies for authors of original expression whose federal copyrights are infringed by states.[7][8][9][10] In 2015, the state government of North Carolina uploaded videos of the wreck of the Queen Anne's Revenge to its website without permission. As a result Nautilus Productions, the company documenting the recovery since 1998, filed suit in federal court over copyright violations and the passage of "Blackbeard's Law" by the North Carolina legislature.[11][12][13] Before posting the videos the North Carolina Legislature passed "Blackbeard's Law", N.C. Gen Stat §121-25(b), which stated, "All photographs, video recordings, or other documentary materials of a derelict vessel or shipwreck or its contents, relics, artifacts, or historic materials in the custody of any agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions shall be a public record pursuant to Chapter 132 of the General Statutes."[14][15][16][17] Thirteen amici including; the United States Chamber of Commerce, the Recording Industry Association of America, the Copyright Alliance, the Software and Information Industry Association and the National Press Photographers Association, filed briefs in support of Allen.[18][19][20] Those briefs proposed various doctrines under which the CRCA could validly abrogate sovereign immunity and variously re-asserted and supported the reasons why Congress examined and enacted CRCA, claiming that Congress was fair in finding that states had abused immunity and that an alternative remedy was needed.[21] On November 5, 2019 the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Allen v. Cooper.[22][23][24][25] On March 23, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an opinion in Allen v. Cooper, holding that Congress had no Constitutional authority to abrogate state sovereign immunity via the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act. In other words, the CRCA is unconstitutional. Congress failed to provide evidence to support the need to abrogate sovereign immunity.

Following the ruling, Senators Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), of the intellectual property subcommittee on the Senate Judiciary Committee, sent letters to the U.S. Copyright Office and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office requesting a study detailing copyright infringements by state governments.[26] The United States Copyright Office gave intellectual property owners suffering infringement by state entities until August 3, 2020 to publicly comment as part of this inquiry.[27] In September of 2020 the U.S. Copyright Office began publishing those comments which reflect hundreds of copyright violations by state entities. [28][29]

As a result of the ruling Nautilus filed a motion for reconsideration in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.[30] On August 18, 2021 Judge Terrence Boyle granted the motion for reconsideration which North Carolina promptly appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.[31] The 4th Circuit denied the state's motion on October 14, 2022.[32] Nautilus then filed their second amended complaint on February 8, 2023 alleging 5th and 14th Amendment violations of Nautilus' constitutional rights, additional copyright violations, and claiming that North Carolina's "Blackbeard's Law" represents a Bill of Attainder.[33][34]

Eight years after the passage of Blackbeard's Law, on June 30, 2023, North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper signed a bill repealing the law.[35]

References[edit]

  1. ^ "NPPA Code of Ethics". National Press Photographers Association. Retrieved 4 Jul 2015.
  2. ^ "501(c)(6) certification letter" (PDF). IRS. Retrieved June 21, 2017.
  3. ^ Mickey Osterreicher, Alicia Calzada (13 June 2019). "Texas Appellate Court holds that government piracy of copyrighted work is not a takings". NPPA. National Press Photographers Association. Retrieved 18 November 2019.
  4. ^ "University of Houston System v. Jim Olive Photography". Copyright Alliance. Retrieved 18 November 2019.
  5. ^ Edwards, Jenny (18 June 2019). "Fstoppers Interviews Jim Olive, the Texas Photographer Whose Copyrighted Image was Stolen by the University of Houston". Fstoppers. Retrieved 18 November 2019.
  6. ^ Sixel, L.M. (14 June 2019). "Texas court says photographer has no recourse against university copyright infringement". Houston Chronicle. Retrieved 18 November 2019.
  7. ^ "Allen v. Cooper".
  8. ^ "No. 18-877". Supreme Court of the United States. Supreme Court of the United States. Retrieved 25 July 2019.
  9. ^ Liptak, Adam (2 September 2019). "Blackbeard's Ship Heads to Supreme Court in a Battle Over Another Sort of Piracy". New York Times. Retrieved 20 October 2019.
  10. ^ Gardner, Eriq (5 November 2019). "Supreme Court Wrestles With Consequences for Piracy by State Governments". Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 16 November 2019.
  11. ^ "Allen v Cooper, et al". Supreme Court of the United States. Supreme Court of the United States. Retrieved 22 June 2019.
  12. ^ Gresko, Jessica (3 June 2019). "High court will hear copyright dispute involving pirate ship". Associated Press. Retrieved 22 June 2019.
  13. ^ Wolverton, Paul (2 November 2019). "Pirate ship lawsuit from Fayetteville goes to Supreme Court on Tuesday". Fayetteville Observer. Retrieved 2 November 2019.
  14. ^ "Allen v. Cooper".
  15. ^ "No. 18-877". Supreme Court of the United States. Supreme Court of the United States. Retrieved 25 July 2019.
  16. ^ Liptak, Adam (2 September 2019). "Blackbeard's Ship Heads to Supreme Court in a Battle Over Another Sort of Piracy". New York Times. Retrieved 20 October 2019.
  17. ^ Gardner, Eriq (5 November 2019). "Supreme Court Wrestles With Consequences for Piracy by State Governments". Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 16 November 2019.
  18. ^ "Allen v. Cooper". Copyright Alliance. Retrieved 18 November 2019.
  19. ^ "NPPA, ASMP asks SCOTUS for protection of copyright infringement by states". NPPA. 13 August 2019. Retrieved 18 November 2019.
  20. ^ "Allen v. Cooper". U.S. Chamber Litigation Center. 9 August 2019. Retrieved 18 November 2019.
  21. ^ Kass, Dani. "Copyright Cavalry Supports Pirate Ship Photog At High Court". Constitutional Accountability Center. Retrieved 17 November 2019.
  22. ^ Murphy, Brian (5 November 2019). "How Blackbeard's ship and a diver with an 'iron hand' ended up at the Supreme Court". Charlotte Observer. Retrieved 16 November 2019.
  23. ^ Wolf, Richard (5 November 2019). "Aarrr, matey! Supreme Court justices frown on state's public display of pirate ship's salvage operation". USA Today. Retrieved 27 December 2019.
  24. ^ Livni, Ephrat (5 November 2019). "A Supreme Court piracy case involving Blackbeard proves truth is stranger than fiction". Quartz. Retrieved 27 December 2019.
  25. ^ Woolverton, Paul (5 November 2019). "Supreme Court justices skeptical in Blackbeard pirate ship case from Fayetteville". Fayetteville Observer. Retrieved 27 December 2019.
  26. ^ Gardner, Eriq (29 April 2020). "Senators Ask U.S. Copyright, Patent Offices to Study Infringement by States". Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 15 June 2020.
  27. ^ "State Sovereign Immunity Study". Copyright.gov. U.S. Copyright Office. Retrieved 15 June 2020.
  28. ^ "Sovereign Immunity Study". Regulations.gov. Retrieved 15 October 2020.
  29. ^ Madigan, Kevin (3 September 2020). "Copyright Alliance Survey Reveals Growing Threat of State Infringement". Copyright Alliance. Retrieved 15 October 2020.
  30. ^ McKlveen, Gina (28 October 2022). "A North Carolina Filmmaker Continues to Challenge State Sovereign Immunity". Institute of Art & Law. Retrieved 24 March 2023.
  31. ^ "Reconsideration Granted" (PDF). Nautilus Productions. Retrieved 5 April 2023.
  32. ^ "4th Circuit Recon" (PDF). Nautilus Productions. Retrieved 5 April 2023.
  33. ^ "PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT" (PDF). IPWatchdog. IPWatchdog. Retrieved 24 March 2023.
  34. ^ Barnes, Greg (14 February 2023). "Fayetteville's Blackbeard shipwreck filmmaker fires back in new court case". CityView. Retrieved 24 March 2023.
  35. ^ "AN ACT TO MAKE VARIOUS CHANGES TO THE STATUTES GOVERNING THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE DEPARTMENT" (PDF). ncleg.gov. North Carolina. Retrieved 21 July 2023.

External links[edit]