A Hudson Valley print-on-demand company claims a Manhattan company unfairly blocked it from selling photos of celebrities.
Wall Art Distributors Inc. of Washingtonville, Orange County, alleges in a complaint filed May 14 in U.S. District Court in White Plains that March Traffic is violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
According to the lawsuit, March “falsely represented that it owned the copyrights with the intent to damage and interfere with WallArt's relationship with Walmart.”
Merch Traffic is a branding and merchandise sales company that represents famous entertainers, including singer Harry Styles.
Wall Art was founded in 2017 by James Ferrazzano of New Windsor and makes about $428,000 a year selling reproductions and posters of celebrities like Styles.
According to WallArt, photos of celebrities are usually taken by photographers who are invited to public events, and the photographers own the copyright to the work.
According to the complaint, many of the photographs in Wall Art's inventory were licensed by photographers to the Everett Collection, which in turn licensed them to Wall Art for reprinting and distribution to private purchasers.
According to the lawsuit, on Feb. 16, March sent 47 takedown notices to Walmart under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, demanding that the wall art images of celebrities be removed from the online marketplace.
Walmart removed the photo and suspended the wall art account.
March asserted, under penalty of perjury, that it had the right to enforce its copyrights.
“March does not, and cannot, claim that it owns or has any copyright in the photographs at issue in this case,” the complaint states.
Wall Art challenged the DMCA action, claiming a license to reprint and sell the photos. March reportedly admitted error, but then argued that it was protecting the celebrity's right of publicity.
According to the complaint, the DMCA does not protect the right of publicity.
Merch later retracted some of its takedown notices, and Walmart reinstated Wall Art's account, according to the lawsuit.
Wall Art said the incident disrupted business for months and damaged its reputation.
The company accuses Merch of violating the DMCA and disrupting its business, and asks the court to block Merch from issuing takedown notices asserting rights it does not have, to declare that Merch has no valid claim to a right of publicity, and to pay unspecified damages.
Merch did not respond to a message seeking its statement.
