Why is it always the case that the strongest defenders of copyright law seem to pop up in cases involving them being accused of violating the copyrights of others? The latest, as pointed out by Paul Alan Levy, is that a "famous" (in the right circles) courtroom sketch artist - who has sketched people at many very famous trials, is now suing both the Associated Press and Getty Images for reselling her images without a license.

The artist, Patricia Ann Lopez, who's been doing this for decades, says she always works as an independent contractor for publications and has made sure to always retain the copyrights. She does license her images regularly to news organizations, but that license doesn't include the right to then resell it. However, the Associated Press is apparently moving on and selling her images despite a lack of license.

Now, you may recall that the Associated Press is one of the more aggressive news-related organizations out there in screaming about the importance of protecting copyright. And, remember how ridiculously aggressive it's been in suing lots of people and companies over their usage of the Obama "Hope" poster images - which were loosely based on an AP photograph. So it seems a bit ironic that the AP would then not properly clear the licenses, and then seek to profit directly from the copyrighted works of others. I guess, as we've seen before, when it comes to the copyrights of others the Associated Press has a very different standard...