Jill Greenberg photograph not cleared for banner ad usage. Ever.

Update time kids - I was right (ain't I always?) - the Jill Greenberg crying child photograph was not sold for commercial use at all. I knew that wasn't her style to sell her art project photographs for commercial use. I thought - even hoped, I'll admit - that there might have been some shady imagebank screwup involved, whom we could all agree to spend hate on, but as Admeta has told me over there telephone, it was all "a mistake".

A mistake. Taking someones artwork and making it an ad was just "woopsie".

Meanwhile Ms Greenberg has contacted me and confirmed that this is a case of copyright infringement, as well as a case of model release troubles. Remember, that little girl has parents who never agreed to this type of publication either.

Please see original thread here: Greenberg's crying toddlers used in ads for Admeta (Sweden).

Comments (5)

  • deeped's picture
    deeped

    Admeta is in big trouble...

    Oct 03, 2008
  • blabla's picture
    blabla

    Shouldn't a company called "admeta" know more about rights for usage in ads? The irony is killing me.

    Oct 03, 2008
  • alex's picture
    alex

    It says here:

    "Admeta has the tools to offer you a solution which will increase the ROI of your company and business forever."

    It also says:

    "Your privacy is our privacy"

    And:

    "Admeta AdImprover automatically improves the results, by displaying the right ad at the right time."

    and then there's:

    "Our state of the art technology derives from our staff’s special competence, high education level and great powers of innovation."

    I'm saying nowt, me.

    Oct 03, 2008
  • Allan1's picture
    Allan1

    One of my former clients had a boss/owner who liked to collect and display avant garde art at the office (since the office consisted of 9 large 2-story buildings on a large campus, he had a lot of room).

    At one point, they had one hallway decorated with Greenburg's ape pictures - around 25 of them. Each picture was about 2' x 3' (IIRC). They were up for about 3 months. In one of the buildings I occupied, they installed about 8 of the crying babies - each about 4' x 5'. They are disturbing to have them hanging over you every day! (Did I mention the buildings had 20+' ceilings? Also, some of the halls were a couple hundred feet long, and 20+' wide.)

    The works are disturbing, and we've previously covered their backgrounds and controversies...

    Oct 03, 2008
  • Dabitch's picture
    Dabitch

    Well, they certainly do provoke a reaction (The end times / crying toddlers series) and are also a favorite to copy in advertising - see Ogilvy & Mather Shanghai shilling "Freshly made angel hair" and Netto "shop small" which clearly are quite ...eh... inspired by the End Times. It was just a matter of time, really, before some ad-hack nicked one of the images for something. I think Greenberg's images have been used in thousands of digital mockups by now.

    Oct 04, 2008

Leave a comment

about the author

Dabitch Creative Director, CEO, hell-raising sweetheart and editor of Adland. Globetrotting Swede who has lived and worked in New York, London, San Francisco, Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Stockholm.