Swiss photographer in legal battle to publish photobook

christian-lutz-injesusname

Image courtesy Christian Lutz and Agence VU'

Agence Vu photographer Christian Lutz is facing a legal challenge launched against his latest book, In Jesus' Name, by a group of people he had photographed

Author: Olivier Laurent

In Jesus' Name, produced in 2012, is Christian Lutz's third book in a series documenting power around the world. In 2007, the Agence Vu photographer published Protokoll on political power, and Tropical Gift in 2010 on economic power. In Jesus' Name documents religious power and is the result of an investigation within the International Christian Fellowship, "one of the most important free churches in Switzerland", says the photographer.

However, legal proceedings filed by a group of 21 people Lutz had photographed have put a stop to the book's production. The group argues that it never granted Lutz the right to use their image, a fact the photographer denies.

"A judge [at Zurich civil court] confirmed the decision to block the release of the book on 24 January," Lutz tells BJP. "We have now asked for the writ, which we should get in the next few weeks. Once we get it, we'll decide whether or not we appeal, but I can already say that the publisher [Lars Müller Publishers] and I are getting ready for a potential lawsuit."

Lutz first met Leo Bigger, the founder of the International Christian Fellowship in May 2011. "He then introduced [Lutz] to the other church managers to whom the photographer also presented his project, his former books, his approach and the stakes involved in his Trilogy," reads a statement released by the Musée de l'Elysée, which is supposed to exhibit Lutz's work later this year.

"He was subsequently granted express consent from the managers who welcomed him in the community. The photographer nonetheless still systematically kept requesting specific authorisations to the organisers for each ICF activity in which he wished to participate and photograph.

"He joined in several trips and summer camps organised by the church, and took part in all sorts of events: celebrations, baptisms, ladies lounges, blood donations, theatre shows, workshops on the addiction to pornography. He met members of the church, exchanged constantly with them, and freely discussed his reportage."

The statement continues: "He was given an ICF photo-reporter badge, and affiliates or organisers of activities regularly ordered prints from him. He thus photographed openly, each one being aware of the project and accepting to be part of it."

The photographer, along with the Musée de l'Elysée and Lars Müller Publishers, have called the ban a "breach of freedom of speech and of artistic expression". They add: "In a non-partisan way, In Jesus' Name highlights the functioning of a religious enterprise and of the individual sharing this living together."

Already, more than 70 photographers, curators and editors have joined a committee to support Lutz's work. For more details, visit the Agence Vu' website.

  • Comment
  • Print
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn

Comments

Could Some Kind Of Photo Release Have Saved A Lot Of Legal Expense?

It's difficult to comment on legal matters without the full information, and evidence. It does seem, however, that this project is, somewhat, different from 'street photography' in that it should have been possible to obtain some kind of written consent prior to the photographs being made.

Of course the story makes me curious to see the images :)

Posted by: Stephen Bray on 11 Feb 2013 at 19:59

Screw the writ

He sohould ship his files/negatives to New York where his work would be protected as "educational" - the otehr alternative is Iceland.

Posted by: Mark Kalan on 12 Feb 2013 at 00:55

Release Forms?

Simple! All he has to do is provide copies of the release forms that he got the subjects to sign. Even beginners in the photography realm know to get release forms from any subject you are planning on trying to make money with once you have photographed them. What? He DIDN'T get release forms?!? Silly man.

Posted by: Buzz on 12 Feb 2013 at 15:09

He will win, or else...

If and when it goes to court he should win without any struggle at all.
The fact he was granted access and the sanctioned permissions to photograph whatever he did IS in itself consent, because they will have a hard time of it trying to prove they were ignorant of the fact that he intended publication.
They have NO case.

Posted by: Peter Harrap on 13 Feb 2013 at 14:11

Updating your subscription status Loading