XL issues 'Contra' statement, Ann Kennis says mom took pic

Again, I will be the first to restate the obvious. What the hell did they buy such a photograph for thier album cover? Any A-hole could have taken any picture of any reasonablly attractive girl in her 20's with a polo shirt

But it's so much hipper if it's from 1983.

I was thinking of caring about this topic, but wisely decided against it.

>

the same reason that sometimes people actually pay for music. because it's the right thing to do. this happens every few years and each time it's dismissed. the issue is only if the photographer misrepresented himself. if he did, he's screwed.

wow i cant wait until they use this as material for a song on their upcominzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

i'm sure their rich parents that helped get them: a) into columbia, and b) unwarranted publicity, will have no trouble writing a check to make this go away.

Eh, the band sucks anyway. Best sue them now before people forget about them in a couple more years. They're the new Franz Ferdinand.

doesn't matter if tod brody took the pic. if the model didn't sign a release authorizing its use he's screwed.

11:19 FF>VW not even close...good try.

11:11 - kinda weird that you know the income and liquidity of 8 strangers.

10:43 There's such a thing as artistic authenticity. Your comment suggests that any photograph can be reproduced over and over by anybody. You're missing the point.

she looked like some stuck up bitch from CT

She should do the world a favor and sue for an injunction for this turd band to never record or publicly perform music again, actually just any creative pursuit to be displayed in any fashion.

12:16 No there isn't.

This the stupidest hipster music-related news in a long time. It really has nothing to do with Vampire Weekend or whether or not you like their music. This bitch should be thankful a pic of her finally got some attention after failing as a model so many years ago. I'm not an expert on the legalities of this, so does anyone know if the Nirvana baby or the Smashing Pumpkin twins got paid crazy money like $2 million for using their likenesses or get paid royalties?

speaking of the Nirvana baby, did Nirvana give Crunch gym permission to do those ads?

I'm guessing Courtney Love did.

it say's the mom would sell hundreds of pics to local shops.
besides being borderline child porn..doesn't that give the right to whomever bought the pics the ownership rights to sell and use them as they see fit?

A picture is worth 1000 lawsuits

Vampire Weekend's music is just as shitty as selling meth.

2:46 - Yes. If her mom sold a box of old pictures then whomever bought the picture should be able to do whatever they want with it.

However the main issue is that "the photographer" Tod Brody went out of his way to claim that A) he took the photo and B) forge a model release.

XL and/or the band will give her a few grand as a settlement, not because they are guilty, but because it's the nice thing to do (ie. good PR). Mr. Brody on the other hand is boned. He won't have to pay 2 million, but his credibility is shattered.

I definitely care less about this story now. What's done can't be undone. As to Why did they use that image? I think it ties right into the cultural backround VW grew up in, and the audience they play to.

Tod Brody (Photog), one would think, should have a series of photos from that same 'event' or photo session or series of candid taken with her. If so, it would likely better support his proof that he took it.
Bottom line is it's his photo until proven otherwise, I'd guess.

dudes, it's called COPYRIGHT. doesn't matter if moms sold pics at a flea market or wherever. if you buy an andy warhol soupcan painting for $5 or $ 5mil, fine it's yours. but you cannot reproduce that image for commercial purpose w/o expressed written consent from the AW estate.

"artistic authenticity" for this particular picture gave me quite a laugh. It's literally a type of picture that anyone with a cellphone can take. It's a small step sideways from a passport picture.

and someone should acknowledge the picture from the classic NES video game contra. BV was probably so proud of himself when he put it up.

were these dudes even born before 1983?

This is made all the more funny by the fact that someone interviewed VW a while ago [I think maybe Pitchfork] and Ezra was very proud to make it a point of cred that the cover was "an actual photo one of our friends took in the 80s."

Look at this way: In 20 years from now, another scandal will break out where some chick's nude grainy pic she sent her boyfriend through an iPhone will be used ironically to give some trendy hipster band nostalgic credibility in their cover art.

the photo is so generic. anyone could have taken it, and anyone could have posed for it, and it would be the same everytime. but i know, it's "art."

VW are idiots for even buying such a thing. such a pretentious thing to do.

This bitch should be thankful a pic of her finally got some attention after failing as a model so many years ago. I'm not an expert on the legalities of this, so does anyone know if the Nirvana baby or the Smashing Pumpkin twins got paid crazy money like