Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

S.D.N.Y.: Public Display of Embedded Instagram Photo Does Not Infringe Copyright

By Amber Harezlak & Aaron Rubin on May 4, 2020
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

A federal district court in New York held that a photographer failed to state a claim against digital-media website Mashable for copyright infringement of a photo that Mashable embedded on its website by using Instagram’s application programming interface (API). The decision turned on Instagram’s terms of use.

Mashable initially sought a license from the plaintiff, a professional photographer named Stephanie Sinclair, to display a photograph in connection with an article the company planned to post on its website, mashable.com. The plaintiff refused Mashable’s offer, but Mashable, nevertheless, embedded the photograph on its website through the use of Instagram’s API.

Instagram’s terms of use state that users grant Instagram a sublicensable license to the content posted on Instagram, subject to Instagram’s privacy policy. Instagram’s privacy policy expressly states that content posted to “public” Instagram accounts is searchable by the public and available for others to use through the Instagram API.

The plaintiff conceded that she was bound by Instagram’s terms of use but argued, among other things, that the sublicense right was invalid because it was “created by a series of complex, interconnected documents.” The court found this argument unpersuasive, stating that “[w]hile Instagram could certainly make its agreements more concise and accessible, the law does not require it to do so.”

This case serves as a good reminder of the importance of website terms of use in protecting website operators and their customers. Unfortunately, because the court determined that Instagram had granted Mashable a valid sublicense, the court did not reach a question that is still open in the Second Circuit: whether embedding an image on a website constitutes copyright infringement. As we previously reported a federal court in New York held that embedding a Tweet in blogs and news articles constituted infringement. That case settled following an appeal. Courts in California, however, have reached a different conclusion.

Photo of Amber Harezlak Amber Harezlak
Read more about Amber HarezlakEmail
Photo of Aaron Rubin Aaron Rubin
Read more about Aaron RubinEmail
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor, Intellectual Property, Privacy & Data Security
  • Blog:
    Socially Aware Blog
  • Organization:
    Morrison & Foerster LLP

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Tennessee Insurance Litigation Blog
  • Claims & Sustains
  • New Jersey Restraining Order Lawyers
  • New Jersey Gun Lawyers
  • Blog of Reason
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo