Kayla,
You have a potential civil action on at least 2 levels, the first is the use of your likeness without your consent, that technically is a copyright violation. That one is cut and dry.

You may also have a punitive remedy if you can prove damages, this one may be a bit tougher but the big win would be the use of your likeness without your consent.

An attorney can advise you how to proceed, and I highly recommend you get one. Check the laws, you may be able to make them answer in YOUR state, particularly if that image shows up in a version of the magazine in your state. Again an attorney would be able to answer that question.

You would probably also name the magazine in the lawsuit as well as the photographer, they have a responsibility to make sure that the images that they publish don't violate anyones copyright (in this case yours) and the magazine does have money.

I suspect you have a winner but a competent attorney is what you need...get one soon.

Thanks Mike. I am leaning more toward a cease and desist letter at this point. It is not the whole, "Hey! I can make a buck here!" thing, it is more over the "Oh CRAP, I do not want people to think I am an excort OR a dancer because my NICHE is 'Girl Next Door'"

Does that even make enough sense? I mean, I am not a pro dancer nor an escort. I am just a chick who happens to have cams in here house and who likes to be watched!

Get an attorney, contingency or not. He doesn't have a release to use your photos -- you now OWN that magazine, you just need an attorney to go claim it for you. :)

*giggle*

I do not think I want it, but thanks!

were all of the pics taken of you in Public places?

If so, he doesn't need a model release anymore.

You're forgetting.. she never signed a release.

Not neccessarily true.. it wasn't a party or group setting.. He still requires a release because of the CONTEXT of the situation.

i agree with the person who said this is an opportunity for you. bleed the publicity for all it's worth. i'm sure your surfers think all kinds of things about you that you're not going to do. work it to your advantage.

I think it was a newsworthy event... she said is was near kids on bikes... sounds like a public newsworthy event.

When people expose themselves in public they have no reasonable expectation of privacy. Think Mardi Gras. Girls Gone Wild.. There are a lot of cases of this and it never works out for the people who were photographed. (unless you can prove the person in the pics was under age)

My advice would be to chalk it up to lesson learned. At least the guy gave her credit and plugged the URL.

What's so bad about to be next to hookers?
Aren't you an online hooker yourself? Please, don't put you up too high; you're as the same as them.
This thread pissed me off.
PIMP

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

No, they were not!

well if you never signed nothing.. how do they know your even 18.. not saying your not .. but i thought all content and that type of shit is supposed to like investigate it really good to make sure you are.. no licenses no check ups.. i thought anyone that took pictures had to take copies of the id.. scan birth cirtificate and all kinds of other shit?

if i were u i wouldnt waste my time persuing this any further for a number of reasons.

1) hiring an attorney to take this case will cost you big bucks, more than you are willing to spend.

2) the chances of winning the case are slim next to none because the judge/jury will not sympathize with you because you willingly took the pictures and knew what kind of magazine this was in the first place.

best bet, just enjoy the free publicity. make everyone think you are an escort, you will make more money. this business is not about dignity its about $$.

just my
:2 cents:

right













not

I live in the Atlanta area, and there are two big magazines like the one she is talking about, and I am sure that it is one of those two. Anyways, they both DO have money, and I believe are actually local divisions of national magazines owned by a parent company that distributes them for each locality.

The magazines are distributed for free and are about 95% ads, all for escorts, strip bars, massage parlors, etc.

Kayla, I appreciate what you do, as I do most of the other professionals on this board. But, there seems to be a slight problem comprehending your next step regarding this issue. So, I'll make my point as brief as possible.

Most of the replies to your request for help have genuinely been in your best interest, yet you do not hear them. I'll repeat it.

An attorney is the only sanctioned official that can properly guide you in this matter. Period.

Many cities and counties have a bar association that provides referrals after a brief review of a case. Call them. It's cheap and it's the only way you will know exactly what you can and cannot do to resolve this issue. Based on their information, you can decide whether to pursue legal action or drop it altogether.

I wish you luck.

Very well put and thank you for bring some reality into this thread.


Yep... plan on spending at least 5k-10k just getting started... Sure you can sue him for lawyers fee's and court cost. You only will collect that if you win... even then he can appeal. So it could be years before he has to pay. Then... he can just file bankrupcy and never pay you. The only person that losses is you in this situation... even if you are right.. you will pay dearly.

Also, like it has been said above... escort traffic is awesome traffic. For solo sites it's like gold. Since you don't escort or dance I hardly see how this would be a huge concern. Maybe a bit embarressing if someone should see it, but its a non-issue. He put your url in the ad so don;t worry. Count up the sales and move on and never work with the guy again.

JMHO Kayle... I hope it works out for you either way.

Can you be more specific? What do you disagree with?

My post assumed that she was in a public place because her previous posts said she was. If the picture was taken in public of something else (or someone) that was also in public, the photographer owns the copyright and can use them how he sees fit.

http://www.faithfuldesigns.com/legal...licphotos.html

Next you're going to tell us that paparazzi photographers get their targets to sign model releases before they sell them to the tabloid mags? RIGHT.... NOT... ;)

Spoken like someone who never *created* anything in his life. She owns her photos. This is a copyright issue, and she has every right to decide where her photos go.

free publicity is almost never bad.

unless the guy starts handing out copies of the magazine to the local churches (like happened to me) I wouldn't even worry about this.

Wrong Goth,

The photog still owns the photos. He may not be entitled to use them the way he did for comercial publication but they are still his pictures because he took them. Now if Kayla hired the photog to take them, then they would be hers.

As far as it being in a public place, I don't think it matters in this situation because Kayla sounds like she was hired to do a shoot. The problem is that he did not pay her for the shoot and did not get proper documentation for comercial use of the pictures.

I at least think she could sue in small claims court and get the maximum allowable with no problems. Maybe she could even get a spot on Judge Judy or the Judge Joe Brown, lol

Cheers,
BV

That's probably the best suggestion on the thread.. She would get a TON of publicity if they let her on the show and the guy agrred (I doubt both of those) but it would be fun to watch :)

BV is pretty close to correct... Doesn't matter if they were taken in a public setting or not... Kayla, you'd lose any lawsuit.... PERIOD.... Bottom line is that you conscented to the photograph, and the photograph was not used for advertising purposes.... those would be the easiest ways to fight him.... you are not a celebrity.... in the common form.... as far as hurting your character... there is NO way any jury will buy that shit.... you're in porn... and the average citizen would put that in the same category as an escort...

Go ahead, pay a lawyer to tell you the same thing.... (if he's any good that is).... Bottom line is that you made a mistake... deal with it....

One simple question though, does this magazine contain ANYTHING that could be even remotely construed as "news worthy"? If so then you have ZERO chance of winning ANYTHING PERIOD....

I am in no way taking either side in this, i'm just relaying the legal facts....

:2 cents:

If he goes outside with her, she does not automatically lose all of her rights.

No I'm not forgetting. What I'm remembering is the legal system is an expensive gamble and this is not an airtight case.

Has anyone noticed that the ones making the negative comments on this are either Photogs or benefit directly FROM photography in one way or another??

Outdoor - Public shoots DO have to have releases if they are "set up--- posed for" (In most states). Thats straight from a REAL lawyer.

Get the legal advice and ignore this drivel. Ask more than one attorney as well. Some won't take a case like this and lawyers are notorious for NOT being straightforward as to why they turn down a case.

Goth is right the photog owns the photos BUT she owns the copyright on her likeness and without her consent he cannot use that likeness.

Thats what model releases are for.

This is not a 5-10K legal issue it may well not even cost her anything, just depends on the lawyer, some are hungrier than others.

Kayla, If you want some decent advise email J D Obenberger from his site www.xxxlaw.net

He can guide ya or send ya to someone who can help. a simple C&D is fine but you may find it is entirely ineffective. If you go that route at least have a lawyer write it...that puts a little muscle behind it.

There is a new mag out next month and all would be forgotten in no time, you know, " yesterdays news...". So before you do anything with any lawyer, try to find out if that guy owns anything, otherwise you are going to have more problems. It dosen't help that you are right, if the guy is broke.