The Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a split decision Monday in *McGucken v. Shutterstock, Inc.*, partially affirming and partially vacating a district court ruling in a copyright infringement lawsuit involving hundreds of unauthorized photographs on the stock photo platform.
Professional photographer Elliott McGucken filed suit against Shutterstock after discovering that hundreds of his photographs appeared on the company's online marketplace between 2018 and 2022 without his knowledge or consent. McGucken alleged violations of federal copyright law under 17 U.S.C. § 106 and claims related to false copyright management information under 17 U.S.C. § 1202.
The case originated in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, where Judge Jennifer H. Rearden granted Shutterstock's motion for summary judgment on all counts in 2023. The district court concluded that Shutterstock could avoid liability for copyright infringement through safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Additionally, the trial court found that Shutterstock's removal of metadata from McGucken's images did not violate Section 1202 of the Copyright Act.
McGucken appealed the district court's decision to the Second Circuit, arguing that the lower court incorrectly applied DMCA safe harbor protections and wrongly dismissed his copyright management information claims. The case was argued before a three-judge panel consisting of Circuit Judges Lynch, Lee, and Pérez on Dec. 2, 2024.
In its decision issued Feb. 10, 2026, the Second Circuit delivered a nuanced ruling that upheld some aspects of the district court's judgment while overturning others. The appeals court affirmed the district court's finding that Shutterstock's actions in removing or altering copyright management information associated with McGucken's photographs did not violate Section 1202 of the Copyright Act.
However, the Second Circuit vacated other portions of the district court's ruling, though the complete details of which specific claims were overturned were not immediately clear from the available court documents. The mixed outcome suggests the appeals court found merit in some of McGucken's arguments while rejecting others.
The case highlights ongoing tensions between content creators and digital platforms over copyright protection and attribution. Copyright management information, or CMI, includes data embedded in digital files that identifies the copyright owner and other relevant information about the work. When platforms remove or alter this information, photographers and other creators argue it makes it harder to track unauthorized use of their work.
Shutterstock operates as one of the world's largest stock photography marketplaces, allowing users to license images for commercial and editorial use. The platform hosts millions of photographs, illustrations, and other visual content from contributors around the globe. Like other user-generated content platforms, Shutterstock has relied on DMCA safe harbor provisions to limit its liability for copyright infringement by users.
Under the DMCA, online service providers can avoid liability for copyright infringement by users if they meet certain requirements, including promptly removing infringing content when notified and implementing policies to terminate repeat infringers. However, courts have increasingly scrutinized whether platforms qualify for these protections, particularly when they play an active role in organizing or promoting content.
The McGucken case represents part of a broader legal landscape where photographers and other content creators are challenging platforms over unauthorized use of their work. Similar disputes have emerged across the creative industries as digital distribution has made it easier for copyrighted works to be copied and shared without permission.
For professional photographers like McGucken, unauthorized use of their work on commercial platforms represents both lost licensing revenue and potential damage to their ability to control how their images are used. The case underscores the challenges creators face in monitoring and enforcing their copyrights in the digital age.
The partial victory for McGucken in the Second Circuit could encourage other photographers to pursue similar claims against stock photo platforms and other digital marketplaces. However, the affirmance of the CMI ruling suggests courts may be reluctant to find violations in cases involving technical metadata removal without clear evidence of intent to facilitate infringement.
The decision also reflects the complex legal framework governing copyright in digital environments, where platforms must balance facilitating user access to content with respecting creators' rights. As visual content continues to proliferate online, courts will likely face more cases testing the boundaries of platform liability and creator protection.
The case returns to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Second Circuit's decision. Neither McGucken nor Shutterstock immediately responded to requests for comment on the ruling. The decision may influence how other courts approach similar disputes between content creatorsand digital platforms going forward.