Of course we don't know her side of the story. When the photographer took the images he was being paid by Liebovitz and acting under her brief __ it might be questionable who does own the copyright.
Excellent point. I hadn't thought of that, but you are absolutely right.
For example, if I remember correctly, in the US the copyright is presumed to be owned by the creator, even in work for hire, unless an agreement to the contrary exists. Whereas in Canada, and possibly elsewhere, in a work-for-hire situation the copyright is presumed to rest with whomever did the hiring unless there is a contract specifying otherwise. At least this is my understanding.
Wonder what the law is in Italy, where the images were taken?