Amy Taylor sues US photographer over “exploitation of her image”

Posted On December 31, 2025December 31, 2025

Amyl and the Sniffers singer Amy Taylor has accused Jamie Nelson, a photographer, of “exploitation of her image” in a United States court.

The complaint against Nelson was made in the District Court of California. It accuses Nelson of selling photographs taken for a Vogue Portugal magazine shoot as “fine art prints” without the subject’s explicit permission.

The relation between the pair goes back to July 2024, when the band’s manager, Simone Ubaldi, requested that Nelson photograph Amyl and the Sniffers for their upcoming album, Cartoon Darkness.

However, the official document states that the photoshoot fell through. It reads, “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.”

At the end of March this year, Nelson contacted Taylor to request that she post for a photoshoot. This time, Nelson shared that the photoshoot had “the express intention that the resulting images […] would be published exclusively in the July 2025 issue of Vogue Portugal.”

The photoshoot went ahead on Taylor’s insistence that “at no point” the images would be utilised for any other commercial use beyond the magazine print. The photos subsequently appeared in the July issue of Vogue Portugal.

On September 4th, Nelson sent the singer selected images, indicating that she wished to sell them as “fine art prints” on her own website.

Ubaldi rejected the request instantly. As per The Guardian, Taylor alleged that Nelson was “well aware of [her] antipathy to such an expanded exploitation of her image.”

After several attempts from Nelson, Ubaldi wrote to her on September 15th: “We are not interested in a buyout of these images … I cannot be clearer about this – [Taylor] does not want you to sell images of her face, or her body as fine art prints.”

The manager’s message continued, “If you had been transparent with her in advance of the shoot about your desire/intentions to sell the photos, she would have said no to the shoot. If you had any notion or desire to sell pictures of [Taylor] to recoup your costs, you should have disclosed this beforehand. We simply would have said no to the shoot.”

However, only a few days later, Taylor and team allegedly discovered that Nelson was using her image to sell “fine art prints”. Nelson allegedly also offered online a “specially designed ‘zine’ that consisted exclusively of both published and unpublished images from the Vogue Portugal article.”

The lawsuit alleges, “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.”

It went on to address the impact this has on Taylor’s image, upon which “Taylor has built a substantial fan following”. Subsequently, Nelson’s unauthorised use of her image is likely to “cause confusion or mistake, or to deceive” regarding Taylor’s endorsement of Nelson’s commercial activities.

Nelson has denied all claims.

Related Topics