In the case of Monge v Maya Magazine, Inc. the plaintiffs are Latin American celebrities Noelia Lorenzo Monge and Jorge Reynoso, with Maya Magazine, Inc., as the defendant.
Monge, a pop singer and model, had gone to great lengths in order to keep her marriage to Reynoso a secret from the public with the objective of preserving her public image as a ‘young, single, pop singer,’ as mentioned in the Monge v Maya Magazine Inc. Appellate case documents. Oscar Viqueira, a paparazzo and occasional driver of the couple, claimed that Reynoso, Monge’s husband and known music produce, had owed him money. After coming in contact with a memory chip in the ashtray of a car Monge and Reynoso had previously used, Viqueira uncovered images of the couple which included photos of their wedding ceremony. Viqueira, instead of returning the chip, decided to sell the images to a gossip magazine to compensate himself for the money he claimed Reynoso owed him.
The pictures were purchased from Viqueira by Maya Magazine Inc., a gossip magazine. The publication of the images was claimed to be used for news reporting, when it seems, given the motive behind Viqueiras’ actions, …show more content…
It was found that the mere broadcasting of the documented beatings during a riot in Los Angeles, was not transformative since “Reuters does not explain the footage, edit the content of the footage, or include editorial comments.” (149 F.3d 987, 993 (9th Cir. 1998)) However, work that is being placed in a specific way, and commentated on would be considered transformative. In this case, the certain arrangement of the work into a photo montage is considered transformative, not only of the work but of the message it sends; instead of reporting on the news of their marriage, they made it seem like a clandestine wedding. The copyrighted materials were used and incorporate into other material to seem more dramatic and appealing, therefore being
Monge, a pop singer and model, had gone to great lengths in order to keep her marriage to Reynoso a secret from the public with the objective of preserving her public image as a ‘young, single, pop singer,’ as mentioned in the Monge v Maya Magazine Inc. Appellate case documents. Oscar Viqueira, a paparazzo and occasional driver of the couple, claimed that Reynoso, Monge’s husband and known music produce, had owed him money. After coming in contact with a memory chip in the ashtray of a car Monge and Reynoso had previously used, Viqueira uncovered images of the couple which included photos of their wedding ceremony. Viqueira, instead of returning the chip, decided to sell the images to a gossip magazine to compensate himself for the money he claimed Reynoso owed him.
The pictures were purchased from Viqueira by Maya Magazine Inc., a gossip magazine. The publication of the images was claimed to be used for news reporting, when it seems, given the motive behind Viqueiras’ actions, …show more content…
It was found that the mere broadcasting of the documented beatings during a riot in Los Angeles, was not transformative since “Reuters does not explain the footage, edit the content of the footage, or include editorial comments.” (149 F.3d 987, 993 (9th Cir. 1998)) However, work that is being placed in a specific way, and commentated on would be considered transformative. In this case, the certain arrangement of the work into a photo montage is considered transformative, not only of the work but of the message it sends; instead of reporting on the news of their marriage, they made it seem like a clandestine wedding. The copyrighted materials were used and incorporate into other material to seem more dramatic and appealing, therefore being