Not having pictures with his name on them circulating that aren't up to standard.
Not setting the precedent that he gives out raw files or unedited/unfinished photos.
This is indeed a business jusgement the OP has to make and my recommendation would be not to give out unedited pictures or anything not up to standard.
Anyone present that might hire him later will expect the same treatment and it will tough to explain later why he made an exception for one person and.not another.
OP asked for advice and mine is to stick to best business practices even though he screwed up npt.having a contract.
If Woody had only gone to the police, this would never have happened.
Yes, of course the best way to have done this would be to have had a contract. To *really* do it the right way, I would have legal representation, pay an attorney to draft a contract specifically for me, covering every possiible event scenario (prints, watermarks, licensing, timeframes, delivery method, number of follow-up edits, max number of attendees, points of contact, etc) and have both parties appear before a notary public. I would also have a subscription to the Photographer's Association (who are a very nice group of people).
Perhaps I'm being a bit hyperbolic, but I've come to this forum for advice on what to do next, given it's entirely a hobby for me and the admission there is no contract. I have to consider the additional expenses of legal contract development and maintenance, service fees, etc. For a guy that does this primarily for my family, and maybe five other times during the year? Fsck that.
This was for an engagement party for the son of a very wealthy and high-profile state politician here in NJ. It came from a recommendation from a mutual friend. I did not add my watermark to the pictures - I don't really care what they do with them. I have no interest in further referrals from anyone at this event. Of course the most prudent thing to do would have been to have had a contract, but we're past that now.
And it's not as if any of this would have prevented them from suing me if they really wanted to.
The groom-to-be said he wanted the "raw files" before receiving any pictures. As it turns out, I don't think the he really had any clue what he was talking about with the "raw files." After I sent him all the processed pictures as JPGs, his ONLY comment to me was, "Are you sure this is all of them?" That's all he said. I responded, and just said, "Yes, that's all 131." I followed up a day later, just to make sure he received my text and to see if he had any other questions, and he simply didn't even bother to reply.
I don't even think he is aware images need to be processed in the first place, and probably was just talking about uploading every picture from the camera, including the "outtakes" kind of thing. I don't think he had any intention of ever editing anything himself - he just expected that pictures directly out of the camera were perfectly exposed and framed and needed no color correction, etc, and that the only differences were that some may not be interesting or were duplicate shots of the same people.
That's okay - I got $550 cash tax free for two hours of work plus an additional maybe two hours of processing the pictures.