Walmart sues widow

[mishele]

I don't get it! Don't big companies try to avoid lawsuits? I mean, why put a red mark on your back over something like this. Walmart already has a bad place with me, this kind of stuff makes it worse. Greed is a horrible thing. The lawer's salaries could of probably paid for the picture rights with no issue. BLAH!!

Think of the headline that they could have...Wal-Mart Thanks Widow For Recovered Pictures!! Ahh...people hate good news! It probably would of never made it to print...lol Good press is priceless, though.

 

[KmH]

Firstly if Walmart family thinks they are in the legal right then paying more just validates a legal wrong, why do that when you know you can win the court case and have the other side cover those fees and also have to give you want you want; about all it costs is time and the family themselves will likely only have to give up minimal time in court itself.

I'm willing to bet money the Walton family attorneys told the Walton family they had little legal basis for pressuring the widow and only had a chance if the widow caved to the pressure early on.

In the community that is informed about intellectual rights the Walton family comes off as the bad guys by pursuing legal action they have little if any hope of winning.
Unfortunately our federal court system is not a level playing field and the side with the most money to throw at attorneys is able to exert the most pressure.

The Walton family wealth is such that even $500 million in attorney fess is like a small amount of loose pocket change to most people.

 

[Braineack]

I don't get it! Don't big companies try to avoid lawsuits?

They have to because they are arguing that the photographer was hired on as an employee of Walmart to take pictures of the family.

 

[KmH]

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf

See - Agency Law.