Legal issues have escalated for Australian punks Amyl & The Sniffers, and right after they announced upcoming tour dates. L.A. courts scheduled a hearing for February 13, 2026, regarding a copyright lawsuit and a restraining order filed last year. The issue allegedly began in June 2024, involving L.A.-based photographer Jamie Nelson.
In December 2025, Nelson filed a civil harassment restraining order petition against Amy Taylor, vocalist of Amyl & The Sniffers. Courts in L.A. did not grant the temporary restraining order. But they did schedule the hearing at this time.
Nelson is cited as the creator and copyright holder of a series of photographs taken of Taylor. The series, titled “Champagne Problems”, appeared in the July 2025 issue of Vogue Portugal. The problem arises for both parties in the subsequent use of these photos beyond their initial purpose.
Essentially, Nelson is accusing Taylor of violating copyright on her photos. Allegedly, a third party related to Taylor distributed them without permission. Prior to this, Taylor accused Nelson of exploiting her image for profit and self-advertisement. Allegedly, she sold fine art prints of the photos. Both parties have taken legal action.
Amyl & The Sniffers’ Legal Battle: Copyright, Exploitation, and Harassment, Oh my!
Jamie Nelson made a statement to Tone Deaf, published on February 3, laying out her own timeline of the legal issues. She also stated that she would not comment on the case outside of contextual facts.
“On December 4, 2025, after a third party related to Amy Taylor publicly posted one of my copyrighted images without my permission, I issued cease-and-desist notices to the third party, Amy Taylor, and Amyl and the Sniffers,” she began.
“On December 9, 2025, I sought court protection by filing a civil harassment restraining order in Los Angeles Superior Court against Amy Taylor,” the statement continued. “That matter remains pending, with a hearing scheduled for February 13, 2026.”
Meanwhile, Nelson’s statement comes after Amyl & The Sniffers sued the photographer sometime in December 2025. The lawsuit, filed in a California district court, accused Nelson of selling fine art prints and a zine of both published and unpublished photos taken during the Vogue Portugal shoot. According to the suit and the band’s manager, Simone Ubaldi, they did not grant Nelson a license to personally distribute the photos, despite Nelson’s copyright.
The Problems Began While Seeking Photography for ‘Cartoon Darkness’ Album
The “exploitation of [Taylor’s] image” claim originally dates back to June 2024. Ubaldi initially reached out to Nelson to do photography for the band’s album Cartoon Darkness, released in October 2024. Nelson wanted to subsequently use the images for her business. But the band “expressly communicated” that she was not to use their image to promote her own photography business. Essentially, she could not use the photos in a public portfolio or distribute the images for personal gain.
“As explained to Ms. Nelson,” stated the complaint filed in 2025, “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.”
Months later, Nelson reached out to Amy Taylor with a photoshoot proposal. These images were intended to exclusively appear in Vogue Portugal. The photoshoot occurred in May 2025, with the issue published in July. Legal documents claim that after the shoot, Nelson asked to sell the images as “fine art prints” on her website.
Ubaldi rejected the proposal, allegedly explaining that Nelson did not have license to use Taylor’s image. “The only permitted use of the [images] had been for inclusion in Vogue Portugal,” the complaint states.
Furthermore, the documents claimed that Nelson was “well aware of [Amy Taylor’s] antipathy to such an expanded exploitation of her image.” Even so, the complaint states that Nelson continually sent requests for permission to use the images. Ubaldi and Taylor denied each request.
On September 15, 2025, Ubaldi allegedly communicated with Nelson regarding the requests. “If you had been transparent with [Taylor] in advance of the shoot about your desire/intentions to sell the photos, she would have said no to the shoot,” Ubaldi said. “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.”
The Battle for Amy Taylor’s Likeness Continues
Essentially, Jamie Nelson could have been upfront about her intentions, but she would have lost out on a job. Subsequently, on September 20, the Amyl & The Sniffers team was notified of Nelson’s print and zine listings on her website.
The complaint alleged that Nelson not only did this without permission, “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 commercial interest.”
Regarding Amy Taylor’s fierce protection of her image and Amyl & The Sniffers’ reputation, the use of the photos potentially goes beyond copyright infringement. The complaint further claimed that Nelson’s use of the images could “cause confusion or mistake” or could “deceive” anyone who recognizes Taylor. It essentially creates a false endorsement of any commercial endeavors for which Nelson uses them.
At the same time, Nelson’s copyright claims could hold weight, as she does hold creator rights over her work. So having a third party post her images without permission could violate those creator rights. The case gets complicated by these distinctions. Amy Taylor is protective of her image, but allegedly trusted the third party enough to allow them to post the photos. Meanwhile, Jamie Nelson owns the copyright to the photos, but does not have Amy Taylor’s permission to use them.
Including the courts in this matter will hopefully help to untangle the complicated web of copyright issues plaguing both Amyl & The Sniffers and Jamie Nelson.
Photo by Didier Messens/Getty Images
The post Legal Battle Continues for Amyl & the Sniffers and L.A. Photographer, Both Citing Copyright Infringement appeared first on VICE.
