What began as a planned magazine shoot for Amyl and the Sniffers’ Amy Taylor has escalated into a legal dispute, with the frontwoman suing a US photographer over the alleged unauthorised sale of her images.
Taylor filed the “exploitation of her image” complaint in the Californian district court, accusing Jamie Nelson of selling the pictures, originally taken for a Vogue Portugal photoshoot.
Per the court documents, the issue began in July 2024 when Amyl and the Sniffers’ manager, Simone Ubaldi, reached out to Nelson to photograph them for their album Cartoon Darkness. The shoot later fell through after they “expressly communicated” to Nelson that they didn’t want her to use the band’s name, image, and likeness to promote her own business.
“As explained to Ms. Nelson, the Band was zealously protective of their image and did not want these used for non-Band-sanctioned, private commercial purposes such as Ms. Nelson had proposed. As a result, the photo shoot was never conducted,” the complaint reads.
Nelson allegedly contacted Taylor months later, requesting to photograph her “with the express intention that the resulting images … would be published exclusively in the July 2025 issue of Vogue Portugal,” the documents claim.
Taylor agreed, but allegedly “at no point” authorised or licensed Nelson the right to make any other commercial use beyond the magazine issue. By September, Nelson sent Taylor and Ubaldi a selection of images she indicated she wanted to sell as “fine art prints” on her website.
Love Music?
Get your daily dose of metal, rock, indie, pop, and everything else in between.
View this post on Instagram
After receiving Nelson’s proposal, Ubaldi claims to have told Nelson that Taylor objected to such use of her image and that “the only permitted use of the same had been for inclusion in Vogue Portugal”. Taylor alleged that Nelson was “well aware of [her] antipathy to such an expanded exploitation of her image” and that no agreement existed authorising Nelson to sell copies of the photoshoot.
Per the documents, Nelson continued to seek a license from Taylor on multiple occasions, to which Taylor “rejected each such request, and no such agreement was ever reached”. Filings go on to say that later in September, Taylor discovered that Nelson was selling “fine art prints” containing the pictures on her website, and using the photos to promote her commercial enterprises.
“Not only was this done without Ms. Taylor’s permission and in direct contravention of her wishes, but it appears to have been done in retaliation of Ms. Taylor’s demands that [Nelson] stop their unlawful exploitation of Ms. Taylor’s name, image and likeness for [her] commercial interest,” the documents allege.
