View Full Version : A friend in a bind. help?...


Mustangood
03-14-2005, 07:21 AM
Ok so my friend recently got into modeling. She met this photographer who did a photoshoot with her. The way it works is she pays him to do the photoshoot, then he puts her pictures out there on the modeling scene to promote her. He seemed like a perv when he said that the least expensive photoshoot was a nudie one. I thought to myself right then "ya he's a perv". I got a feeling when I first met the guy,(only time i met him) that he was a pervert. She could only afford the cheapest shoot.(around $200 or something)So he kept trying to convince her to do nude shots and she didn't want to. So he said since he liked her he would let her slide. Which meant he let her do whats called "implied nude" where she is mostly nude but she covers up. So she did the shoot, and it all seemed like it was going the way it was supposed to. So later she signs the release contract saying that he has the rights to her photos and can post them online, or do whatever he wants with them. After she mailed it she was talking to some other photographers who knew who this guy was. They told her the guy was basically a pervert and would exploit her. They said he basically "likes to say that he does nudes so he gets free nudes". And maybe some of you have heard of the model Tila Nguyen, well she got scammed by him too some years ago when she first started out and had to get a lawyer. So now my friend doesnt want him to use the photos but she already signed the contract and so it seems theres nothing she can do. I said maybe if she just cut off all contact with him then maybe he wont bother using her photos. (cuz why would he try to promote a model that he cant get a hold of right?). Ya so basically, she doesnt want these photos getting out and it seems like its too late. And yes she realizes this was a bad idea trusting this guy and now I'm just trying to help her out and think of anything that can be done. This is the contract Model Release (http://www.iclique.com/ModelRelease.htm). It seems pretty solid to me but Im not a lawyer and dont know how to interpret these contracts that well. Anyone have any ideas? And please no "well she was stupid in the first place for blah blah..." responses. I know she made a mistake and now I just want to see if there is any way to get her out of this.

ps.
the photographer is Carlos Quintero. and basically hes a scamming creep.


EDIT: hereby represent that I am over the age of eighteen years, and that I have read the foregoing and fully and completely understand the contents thereof.

Ok i doubt this will help but, she is 18, not "over 18". So does "over the age of eighteen" mean being 19 or is age considered to the day? meaning she would be 18 years and some # of days old?

Mustangood
03-14-2005, 07:44 AM
Does this mean anything?
Under what is commonly known as the "Right of Publicity," individual persons (or in certain states the estate of dead persons) are entitled to control the commercial exploitation of their image. Commercial exploitation includes advertising or selling products, goods, or services for money or any venture that is designed to generate profit or convey a product endorsement and does not entail a legitimate educational or editorial reason for the use. (There also exists a similar but separate doctrine known as the "Right of Privacy" which acknowledges and protects people’s right to be left alone and not dragged into the public spotlight).

UPDATE:
But I also read this...
Those who agree to be in a photograph before it is taken are termed "models." One does not have to be a professional model to pose for a picture. When the model is a professional there will usually be a contract with the photographer or modeling agency defining the scope of permitted uses of the model’s image, often allowing the model to have approval rights over certain uses and/or providing for more money upon publication of the photographs. If the intended use is outside the scope of the model’s contract, the party wishing to use the photo may need to obtain a special release for the particular use of the photograph directly from the model. When a modeling agency or freelance photographer obtains a release directly from the model, this may abrogate the need for a publisher to directly contact and negotiate with the model, but the release must be consistent with what the publisher wants to do with the photo, otherwise it will not be effective. If such a release limitation is breached, the publisher, photographer, and modeling agency may be liable for misappropriation of name, image, or likeness, as well as breach of contract. Often the photographer will be asked to indemnify the Producer for any legal consequences that arise out of any defects in such a previously obtained release.



from http://www.vergemag.com/1000/feat/copyrt.html

HAUS
03-14-2005, 07:49 AM
i seriously suggest getting a lawyer and fighting it. the one thing you could fight is the contract saying over 18 years old. now if it said 18 and older i highly doubt it. get a free constaltation from a lawyer and see if its worth fighting. but there could be a loop hole in that over 18 years old part of the contract. maybe you'll be lucky and there will be a lawyer on this board or a law student that could give you some advise. please let us know how it turns out.

HRnB
03-14-2005, 05:02 PM
The only thing she can do is buy the contract from him. She can fight it, but a contract is just that. If you could get out of a signed contract that easy, they would never have any meaning. If she hires an attorney, she's just going to get scammed again by him unless she can find one that will take the case pro bono or on percentage of restitution. If an attorney won't take the case based on percentage, then she probably doesn't have a case.
I read that the "Girls Gone Wild" company has been sued hundreds of time and have never had to pay a dime in restitution, but they have lost a couple cases and had to remove the girls from the video they were in.

MikeHawke
03-14-2005, 05:07 PM
some people are pieces of sh!t and know exactly how to take advantage of young girls. This scumbag prolly does it ALL the time.

I doubt she has any legal recourse but that guy should be strung up by his gonads.

Choppa
03-14-2005, 05:13 PM
he is entitled to do what he wants those pictures now cuz of the contract. meaning he can look at them show them too people whatever but he cant make money off of them i think its too late to get the pics back or ne thing like that. but since there are already taken and if he plans to sell them or put them on the internet she should try to get a % of the profit from that. thats the only thing i can think of.

o ya does that ripping up a contract thingy really work? does ripping a contract void it?

xRockThePonyx
03-14-2005, 05:17 PM
ORIGINAL: HotRods_n_Booze

The only thing she can do is buy the contract from him. She can fight it, but a contract is just that. If you could get out of a signed contract that easy, they would never have any meaning. If she hires an attorney, she's just going to get scammed again by him unless she can find one that will take the case pro bono or on percentage of restitution. If an attorney won't take the case based on percentage, then she probably doesn't have a case.
I read that the "Girls Gone Wild" company has been sued hundreds of time and have never had to pay a dime in restitution, but they have lost a couple cases and had to remove the girls from the video they were in.


Booze is right on this one. You have got to be SO careful with modeling companies because there is a lot of fine print. My mom was once a model, a family friend of ours, and i'm looking into it as well. It's very shady, and they have a lot of leeway when it comes to the legal stuff.

MikeHawke
03-14-2005, 06:16 PM
i still say he should be strung up by his nutsac

fuggin douche

Emann0007
03-14-2005, 07:51 PM
Not to be mean or a jerk, but no model starts out doing nudes. If so, they are gonna go nowhere. That contract looks pretty solid, and she could have signed that contract on her 18th birthday, and its valid. Not worth the money it will cost to get a lawyer. As stated above, she could buy back the rights to the pictures, but chances are if any damage was gonna be done, it already has been. Best bet is to just let it go. If she wants to be a model, then him advertising her can't be bad. Even if he is a douschebag. Tell her to not owrry about it and find a more respectable and well known photographer next time. Photographers are notorious for being manipulative pervs.

She just needs to try and be a lil more careful next time. She should just be glad/proud of herself for not giving him nude pics.

Mustangood
03-14-2005, 08:05 PM
So who or what determines the price to buy back the rights?

Mustangood
03-14-2005, 08:05 PM
FIX: posted twice

xRockThePonyx
03-14-2005, 11:28 PM
I'm sure he has some legal tidbits on that. It might be in the contract somewhere, incase they ever want to opt out. I bet the two of them will have to come up with a price together if it's not stated in the contract. I don't really know, and neither did my mom because she never got put in that situation. [&:]

HAUS
03-15-2005, 01:36 AM
if the guy took the nudes im sure there already on the net and buying back the photos is gonna be worthless cause the damage is already done. but i have a question for you guys. since she only 18 years old, do you think there is a loop hole in the contract where it can be voided by when it said Over 18 years old. technically shes not over 18. she is 18. the guy should of put 18 and older.

87 hatch
03-15-2005, 02:06 AM
tell her to call him and ask if she can buy the contract back. if she does that, get him to sign something saying that he will not in any way shape or form use the pictures. then if he does you have a case.

HAUS
03-15-2005, 02:16 AM
ORIGINAL: 87 hatch

tell her to call him and ask if she can buy the contract back. if she does that, get him to sign something saying that he will not in any way shape or form use the pictures. then if he does you have a case.

but buying the contract back is going to be worthless if the pics are all over the net. if he says he wont post them and he'll take them down. what about all those people that have them saved on there computer. there not going to disappear. i now believe theres nothing she can do. only way is if he has not posted them on the internet. then she could get the pics back and he and her could sign something. but most likely there already on the net.

MrAWatts
03-15-2005, 05:08 AM
Ok, I believe I have a solution. The law is designed to protect people, correct? Your privacy, and your right's. You said that he regularly does nudes and that he would let her slide. Ok, that right there is crap, he can't drop a client if she won't pose nude. Just mentioning that statement to a lawyer would do a world of good for her. Modeling, and modeling nude are two completely diffrent things. If someone is looking to be a model, and they go to a photographer, that photographer is in no position to decline someone because the person won't pose nude. It would be an exception if the photographer was an exclusively nude photographer, because that would be his thing, his job, and he would be expecting nudes. People seeking him out would also be aware of that.

Also, you mention that some other people she talked to knew of this guy, and that he is a pervert that likes to exploit people. Well, the law backs contracts..a deals a deal, but she is not bound by a contract if she knows for certain this guy is a pervert who will exploit her. She needs to get a lawyer, tell him the whole deal. Definately mention how he tries to imply that he would let her go because she won't pose nude, if he didn't like her. That's like a subtle way of hinting. She also needs to get people who know about how this guy is a pervert, and will exploit her. That's all it would take to bring him down. Do you think that the law would enforce that contract if they knew that he was just a pervert that want's to misuse the pictures, and exploit her? Nope. Well that's my 2 cents, but I think it's how she should tackle the problem.

Dbeck002
03-15-2005, 06:23 AM
[sm=ttiwwp.gif]

83GT306
03-15-2005, 07:00 AM
Well, that settles it...the alleged exploiting photographer should be terminated and disposed of....................I'll be back.

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. This is not a laughing matter. lol[sm=shootshoot.gif]

Aims66
03-16-2005, 07:17 AM
So how is it all going? Any ideas of what you can do? has the photographer had a change of heart? or does he even have a heart?

Mustangood
03-16-2005, 07:22 AM
So far she's hooked up with another photographer who is much better and the contract is definately better and professional. It basically says the photographer can't force her to do anything that she "deems as uncomfortable" and he can only use the photos for their intended use. Its just a way better deal. Ill detail more later