Amyl and the Sniffers embroiled in US authorized battle after photographer countersues singer | Amyl and the Sniffers

Rock band Amyl and the Sniffers have change into embroiled in a authorized battle over photoshoot rights between their lead singer and a photographer who has utilized for the case to be thrown out.

Amy Taylor, the band’s frontwoman, had taken photographer Jamie Nelson to court docket for promoting high-quality artwork prints based mostly on photographs of Taylor.

Nelson has now countersued Taylor, her companion and the band for harm for allegedly infringing copyright by reposting the photographs on Instagram, asking the choose to dismiss the case – which is being heard in Los Angeles – with out a trial.

The case centres on Nelson’s photoshoot of Taylor in May 2025 for Vogue Portugal, a collection titled “Champagne Problems”. Taylor’s court docket submitting claims her supervisor, Simone Ubaldi, rejected Nelson’s request to promote the photographs as “fine art prints”.

“If you had been transparent with her in advance of the shoot about your desire/intentions to sell the photos, she would have said no to the shoot,” Ubaldi wrote, in line with court docket paperwork.

Nelson in October posted the photographs on social media and offered limited-edition prints priced from US$1,500 to US$18,000, in line with her counterclaims, filed on 16 February within the California district court docket.

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News e mail}

“This is a standard practice in the fine-art and editorial photography industry and part of [my] regular professional practice,” Nelson’s court docket submitting reads.

The photographer has claimed she spent about US$20,000 on the Vogue shoot from her personal pocket and had full copyright possession.

Taylor’s legal professionals took Nelson to court docket in December for “exploitation of her image,” claiming that solely the singer’s fame gave the prints worth and that she by no means permitted Nelson to make use of the photographs for something apart from Vogue.

Her legal professionals mentioned they requested Nelson to cease promoting the prints from the shoot and take away all of the photographs from her web sites. Nelson has claimed she then demanded the band members take down the photographs from the set from their on-line accounts however they continued to make use of them.

Taylor’s lawyer, Jonathan Pink, wrote in reply: “No one questioned your copyright interest, but likewise, no one provided to you Miss Taylor’s consent for use of her image in a commercial manner.”

Nelson claimed the band made cash from posting her photographs whereas they have been touring. She mentioned she had suffered financial and reputational harm, with their reposts and feedback discouraging folks from shopping for her prints, dropping her enterprise alternatives and reducing the market worth of her work.

“Artists should be able to publish, display, and sell their work without feeling pressure to relinquish their rights,” Nelson mentioned in an announcement.

“Independent artists often find themselves defending their rights against well-funded opponents … [and] face pressure to abandon their rights simply because of disparities in resources and influence.”

Nelson has accused Taylor, the band and Taylor’s companion of copyright infringement for allegedly reposting her photographs, in a countersuit asking the choose to strike down Taylor’s case.

Nelson mentioned she had additionally filed an “anti-SLAPP” movement, underneath legal guidelines designed to discourage civil claims towards folks’s speech or expressive exercise, “seeking protection of my first amendment rights”. She is representing herself in court docket, she mentioned, “due to the overwhelming cost of lengthy and complex legal proceedings”.

Nelson mentioned she had individually filed for a restraining order towards Taylor on 9 December to stop civil harassment, which is pending and shall be heard by the Los Angeles superior court docket on 6 March.

Pink and the band’s supervisor have been contacted for remark. Pink instructed the Australian Broadcasting Corporation final week his workforce had labored for an amicable decision, saying they have been assured of their case whereas Nelson had “sought to needlessly escalate this fight”.

The singer’s grievance had alleged Nelson’s use of the photographs meant Taylor would “continue to suffer” hurt, together with “lost profits and damages to her reputation, brand, and business interests”.

Taylor’s workforce on Friday filed paperwork as a part of the court docket course of earlier than additional case administration on 5 March. Nelson’s separate restraining order shall be heard on 6 March.