Model Sues!

Odd...I wonder what kind of model release would give a model the right to veto potential uses for the photos from a session when the end use is not porn or something like that????
 
If I read the story correctly she claims she never signed a model release back in 1983 when the image was made.

A consent form allowing the band permission to use the photo was purportedly signed by Kennis -- but she insists the signature on the papers is a forgery.
 
Ouch that might be hard to prove (on both sides) as that is cutting the clock back quite a way. However unless she can prove that it is beyond doubt a forgery I doubt she will win the case.
 
I'm not sure what it is you are trying to do but if you post enough threads about photogs getting sued, yes, you will create the illusion that it is a dangerous profession.

It is not. You make me think of the government that tries so hard to rule us through fear.
 
I'm not trying to do anything beyond sharing what I thought was an interesting, and related to the General Shop Talk forum section, news item.
 
Very interesting read that one, thanks Keith for sharing

Would really like to know, how this case ends - i.e. who wins in the end. Guess both sides really will have quite a hard time proving anything...
 
However unless she can prove that it is beyond doubt a forgery I doubt she will win the case.

Actually the legal standard is much less than that. In civil cases it's what's called a "preponderance of the evidence," which is basically more likely than not. Beyond a reasonable doubt is the higher, criminal standard.
 
Regardless of how it ends, the lawyers will always win
 
man that is going to be tough to prove in her favor or against her favor... who would keep a model release that old...
 
That's what they get for trying to go cheap.

Actually paying someone for an image would have cost far less than spending $100 or whatever on a stock photo.


not a bad band though.
 
man that is going to be tough to prove in her favor or against her favor... who would keep a model release that old...
As I understand it they have the model release but that the model is claiming that its a forgery.
 
They'll probably settle for much less than it would cost to litigate. It's a crappy case on both ends.
 
sounds like somebody that did a shoot for free because she probably wanted to be a model to add to her portfolio and then sees years later that they used it so now she wants some money out of it...and she wants more than what the gig probably would have gotten her...
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top