Legal Hypothetical...SoloGirl Is Attacked!!!
 

Ok so hypothetically, your the webmaster of this sologirl site. The girl takes active part in her own site, you just pimp it for her.

She gets a decent membership base, and starts to be recognized. She Goes out to a club some night, one of her fans recognizes her, and rationalizes that scince she takes her clothes off on her website, it must be EASY for her to do it in real life...

From that point on pick your poison. She gets assaulted, Sexually assaulted, Harassed, Stalked ECT...


From that point on, she obviously decides to STOP participating with the site and/or shut it the fuck down. Then decides to come after you legally(sues) as being the "catalyst" for her victimization in the assault/harassment/ect...

Does she succeed in shutting down the site?

Does she have a case for Sueing you?


Discuss...:pimp

Before I had my tattoo shop, I was an attorney in Berlin.

I have one word for you and your situation: CONTRACTS

Damn. did you make this shit up, or is this happening to you? You can't make this up.. WOW

So you are saying because you are business partners, you are responsible for controlling the world for her....?

It all depends on if there is a solid contract signed between you two or not. If there is no contract, and this was a verbal thing b/ the two partners, I believe she could successfully have the site shut down and retain all the content.

She could potentially shut the site down...Its happened publically on GFY before.

BUT... assuming theres a legit contract signed ...

Could she go after the webmaster for "indirectly causing harm"???

That would almost be akin to going after stocking and mini skirt manufactures after a girl gets assaulted since they make her look like she wants it anyways.

good plan, i'm gonna start suing miniskirt companies for causing me gross sexual discomfort and harassment, lol...

"she's sexually harassing me right now! i got a stiffy!"
http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/wp.../08/beavis.jpg
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Right ALMOST, but were talking about PORN, and the "exploitation" of women.

IMO, its more akin to someone suing McDonalds because they eat there and they got fat, or

if you shovel the snow on your sidewalk away, but somebody busts their ass on it anyway, they can sue, but if you diddnt shovel and they bust their ass, no big deal or

Someone breaks into your house and your dog bites them, but because you diddnt have "beware of dog" signs outfront, the robber can sue you and win.


Is there anychance This Solo Girl could have a case in a situation like this???

When a photograph is taken the photo is owned by the photographer, not the model. And in nearly every case there is a model release form, if only mostly for 2257 reasons.

You can't sue someone because they made you fameous and you got attacked because of it.

Wow, so many lawyers hang out on GFY late friday night..

who is the sologirl? cmon spill the beans allready.

It all comes down to contracts. Thats the exact reason why they exist.
If the girl decides she wants to take a content producer to court in order to try and clean up her image, shes opening up a whole new can of worms that she will most likely regret ten fold.

Forget someone about recognizing her. She will now have her real name connected to the case as public record, and anyone who wants to do a background check on her, can easily look up that info in 1-2-3 seconds.

and thats the best case scenario, even if she wins, which I'm 100% sure she won't if she signed a contract. In that case, her images are still online, and now she has a public record linking her real name to such images.

If she was paid for images, and signed a release, It's probably in her best interest to shut the fuck up, or the content producer can easily sell said images as webmaster content, and every joe blow around the world will have a copy of her ID.

Solo Girl needs to realize she is not the first girl to change her mind about being looked at as a sex object, and thats why there is a contract.

So all the what ifs, hold no water, period.

I'm surprised it hasnt happened already.

I've thrown a lot of club events myself and we even make sure the non-nude gogo dancers have security, I dont see how a popular solo-girl model could go out to a club with just 'the girls'.

A solo girl should realize that this is a business. A business that has it's rules and one of them is that if there were other people involved in getting her where she is, she cannot just walk away and leave everyone hanging after what has been invested into it. And this should be adamant - cut in stone - when a contract is written. If a band gets sheltered by a label, they do the same thing - sign a contract which protects that labels investment. Because if I put my money and connections to help you get up there and when you’re up there you decide to walk away on me (even if it’s because you get assaulted by fans who recognize you), there will be a document preventing you from doing so.

Just as it has been said here numerous times in this thread – get your ass covered and sign a contract which protects your investment. You put a lot of effort and money to turn the girl into a star. You got to make sure she doesn’t leave you hanging when you just get to the point when you start to collect for all the efforts you have invested.

Only in America, leaders of the free world

whats that supposed to mean???

it obviously means nothing.....zip.....nada

don't quit your day job


LOL

just puzzled where that came from.

I didnt see anyone mention anything about America in this thread.

Didn't this kind of happen once? I thought I read that one of the reasons Tiffany Teen left was because she started getting recognized and it freaked her out.

If this is a true story I would say it depends on the contracts you have with her. I can't see how she could sue you for getting her into this, that would be like Cameron Diaz suing the Farelly Brothers for putting her in There's Something About Mary and making her famous.

She could go after the webmaster for looking at her the wrong way or chewing bubblegum in her presense, if she wanted to. The real question is would she be sucessful.

And, frankly, yeah, I reckon it could be argued, assuming she didn't have perview over the way that the content was displayed on the internet, that the way her content was presented gave the assaulter a false sense of what the model wanted or expectation - and that somehow led to her being assaulted (e.g., to give an extreme as an example: 'This gal likes to be smacked around in public clubs - so be sure to smack her if you see her' within the contents of the website).

But that's why any sensible contract would always have a limitation of liability clause somewhere... in just about _any_ business arrangement.

There's too many possibilities to give you a cut-and-dry answer, but I would think that, all things being 'normal', it's be a hard case for her to win.

:1orglaugh

I have not heard of a girl who signed a contract, sue the producer to have the site removed. EVER.

I have heard of producers telling girls whatever they wanted to hear to get there clothes off, and having to send out a email to all their affiliates 6 months later, because they didn't get the girl to sign a contract or a release.

it was a test to see who would scream first from the top of his lungs
AMERICA HATER or BASHER :winkwink:

Does she have a case?

No...

Why? Because she knowingly participated in the website. She regularly participated in its day to day operations in order to increase its members base by becoming more and more popular.

That would be your attorney's motion to dismiss and it would be dismissed.

Im not from America, but yes, if thats what you wanted, I can see how that would provoke such a response.

this is a good thread actaully

If she was actively part of the site, I think it would be really hard to hinge blame on you in a courtroom.

well theres several things at play here.

#1 anyone can sue anyone for anything and ask for anything. winning is another story.

#2 relevence . i will make upa hypothetical situation. Lets say the site was made by the webmaster including text etc not the model in any way other than the pictures. lets call her "party girl" , lets say the site showed the girl having sex or taking off her clothes in public situations. Now lets say the webmaster has added text such as

" When' im clubbing i like to be suprised in a dark alley and fucked from behind"

theres prob a good chance a judge will find it a contributing factor.

I would think though that the model would likely have to compensate the webmaster for the lost revenue.

Many models/actresses have stalkers etc or have been attacked , i have never heard of them suing and winning..

but did this supposed Solo Girl sign a release, and a contract?

she then has to prove she was attacked, and then prove that the person attacked her because of bla bla bla

No matter how a contract is written an individual can not surrender there right to sue for tort damages (i.e. anything they may up as harm) but like Smokey alluded to, that doesn't mean they can win or have a case with substantial merit.

As long as the contract details her free willingness and active participation, and there we're no questionable factors affecting here participatory judgement such as drugs drink or forceful coercion during shoots you should come out ok. :2 cents: