Listing photos at center of lawsuit naming Compass, Side

Who owns photos of a real estate listing? The broker? The photographer? And what exactly happens when a photo used in marketing material looks essentially identical to an already copyrighted photograph? 

Based on suits filed on Friday by builder, real estate broker and professional photographer Alexander Stross, the answer is legal action.

Stross filed two suits on Friday in U.S. District Court in Austin against Compass and Side, as well as Adam Ray Walker, who is brokered at Compass and operates as Walker Residential Group, Bob Hatchel, who is brokered at Side and does business as Record Realty, and 10 unnamed “Does” at each firm. At the center of the suits are listing photos.

The Does are “other parties not yet identified who have infringed Plaintiff’s copyrights, have contributed to the infringement of Plaintiff’s copyrights, or have engaged in one or more of the wrongful practices alleged herein.” The complaint states that the true names, and whether or not they are corporate or individual, are not yet known. 

According to the filings, Stross owns eight original photographs, which he claims were registered with the U.S. Copyright Office in February 2012. According to the complaint “Stross is a well-regarded architectural photographer who has worked with some of the biggest names in Central Texas real estate.” 

Stross’ photos have been published in Luxury Home Magazine, Luxe, Refine, and New Home Guide, and he regularly licenses his photographs to real estate agents and brokers for use in their marketing. 

According to the complaint, the defendants had access to the eight photographs in question via Stross’ website or social media and copied these photos “verbatim” in their marketing photos for listings. 

“Defendants used and distributed copies of the Subject Photographs, and exploited those copies for commercial purposes on the WRG Website, without Stross’ permission,” the Compass filing states.  

In the suit, Stross claims that each act of copyright infringement caused him to suffer damages “in an amount to be established at trial.” 

“Furthermore, Defendants have obtained profits they would not otherwise have realized but for their infringement of the Subject Photographs, which entitles Stross to disgorgement of Defendants’ profits attributable to the infringement of the Subject Photographs in an amount to be established at trial,” the complaint against Compass states. 

In both suits, Stross is demanding a jury trial, asking the court to be “awarded all profits of Defendants, and each of them, plus all Stross’ losses, the exact sum to be proven at the time of trial,” and attorneys fees. 

Compass did not wish to comment on this issue and Side did not return a request for comment.