writes "Reuters reports that a Manhattan District Judge has ruled that AFP and the Washington Post infringed a photographer's copyright by re-using photos he posted on his Twitter account. The judge rejected AFP's claim that a Twitter post was equivalent to making the images available for anyone to use (drawing a distinction between allowing users to re-tweet within the social network and the commercial use of content). The judge also ruled against the photographer's request that he be compensated for each person that viewed the photos, ruling instead that damages would be granted once per infringing image only. This last point should might interesting implications in file-sharing cases--can it set a precedent against massive judgements against peer-to-peer file-sharers?
From the article: "The case is Agence France Presse v. Morel, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 10-02730.""Link to Original Source