Legal issue with bride

[natalie_l]

<p>Hi everyone,<br>

I was hired as a 2nd shooter at a wedding in September 2009 and was paid a fee to upload my edited images on flickr for the bride. I was given permission by the photographer to use these images in my portfolio: both online and print. The photographer was very happy with my help and hired me for two more events in October 2009 and November 2009 all of which I was given permission to use the images in my portfolio and paid a fee to 2nd shoot. <br>

In December, 2009, the bride emailed me directly and requested a copy of the dvd with full ownership. Since she wanted ownership (which was not part of our originally contract), I suggested a she purchase the dvd for a fee of $300 for full ownership. I was surprised that the photographer had her client contact me directly, but replied to the bride with permission from the photographer first. I never heard back from the bride via email.<br>

I was told by the photographer several weeks later (when I got out of the hospital*) who booked this wedding and hired me that the bride wanted this CD for free and was considering legal action. I immediately mailed the CD to the photographer. It has come to my attention that this photographer failed to provide the CD to the bride and now I received a letter that I'm being sued under my business (and her business). The photographer had told me several times, that she wanted to get paid for this CD of extra images. I didnt want to get sued so I told the photographer the bride could have full ownership for free because it seemed there was a miscommunication. I'm afraid the photographer held on to this CD to try to obtain extra money on my behalf. Naturally, I'm upset that she never provided the bride with my cd.<br>

I contacted the photographer and she became quite upset and apologized to me profusely for holding on to this CD. I'm not sure what to do to protect myself legally.<br>

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.<br>

Natalie<br>

*In the month of January, I was hospitalized and in pre-term labor at just 32 weeks pregnant. They kept me in the hospital for 2 weeks and I spent the entire month of January there. My daughter had some health issues and we stayed in the hospital for quite some time. When I was finally home and getting settled in February, the photographer told me the issue with the bride. I responded and thought this was no longer an issue until today when I received this letter from the attorney for the bride.</p>

 

[evan_goulet]

<p>Protect yourself legally with a lawyer. Posting details of legal issues on a website where you are searchable, granted you don't give full last name, isn't the greatest idea.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Natalie -</p>

<p>Sorry to hear about your and your daughter's health issues - hope all is well now.</p>

<p>As for the issue with the bride - what does the contract say? and where are you located? </p>

<p>I'm kind of confused - who did you have a contract with? The bride or the other photographer? If you had a contract with the other photographer and not one with the bride - there may not be anything that she can sue you for...even if you had a contract with her - if the CD was not part of the terms of the contract - then I'm not sure why she'd be suing anyone.</p>

<p>Also - depending on where you live - Lawyers do not serve papers for lawsuits - that's the domain of the local law enforcement office (sheriff typically). Chances are the that the letter from the lawyer - without me reading it - is just a threat that if you don't pony up the DVD / CD - then a lawsuit will be filed.</p>

<p>Keep in mind - I'm a photographer, not a lawyer and the advice given is photographer to photographer. </p>

<p>1. Get all communication that you had with bride - hard copy. You'll need it.</p>

<p>2. Chances are that she is at the threat stage with this and will be willing to settle for a copy of the dvd of images and perhaps a small sum. Have your attorney (you do have one right?) call hers and find out what is going on.</p>

<p>3. Unless this is a really large contract - chances are that it will end up in small claims - which typically (not always, but typically) means that you and the plaintiff represent yourself - Some states / jurisdictions do allow attorneys)</p>

<p>4. Having served on enough juries - I know that 99% of the time in a civil suit - the parties try to settle / negotiate right up to the last minute. Lawyers don't like to go to court either - they want a settlement - since once the case in the jury or judge's hands they lose control.</p>

<p>5. Don't post anymore here about this - anything you say here - can and will be used against you - that includes any e-mails that you send any members of this forum - and any communication you had with the photographer.</p>

<p>Good Luck - Hopefully this is a simple misunderstanding that can be cleared up with a CD and a call.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

[natalie_l]

<p>Thank you Dave. I appreciate your advice above. I had received a letter today by the attorney fyi</p>

[picturesque]

<p>You need to get a lawyer. And as Dave says, don't post any more about this online anywhere, or send e-mails about the case to others, until this issue has been completely resolved.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>Hopefully permission of the people in the imagery, particularly the newlyweds, was given for this use if you are in a jurisdiction that recognizes promotional portfolio use as commercial use requiring permission of the subject within. As to the subject you asked about, If you had no contractual relationship with the bride, it is unfortunate that you decided to engage in these interactions and opened a potential 'can of worms'. Its difficult to ascertain the actual nature of your position since there are missing parts of the story. In any event, if the bride is merely seeking the images, and you have a right to give them to her and are still willing, couldn't you just do that and get a release in exchange indicating that no legal claims will be asserted against you in return?</p>

[hon_ng]

<p>Why not contact the client directly, discuss the matter and clear up the misunderstanding. I am sure the bride is reasonable and wouldn't want to go through the hassle of a legal proceeding.</p>

[mark_t5]

<p>i truly hope there was a contract somewhere in this mess.. check what's on there and who is entitled to what...and go ask a lawyer</p>

[rayt]

<p>The contract was with the primary photographer. You were paid by the primary photographer. If you did not sign the contract you are not legally bound to the contract. The letter from the lawyer is just a method to try and get some satisfaction from anyone. A carpet bomb. You delivered the images to photographer that had a contract between themselves and the bride. Your obligation was to the primary photographer, not the bride.</p>

<p>You should have no communication with the bride in any fashion. Any requests or communications from the bride should be diverted to the main photographer. It is too late now but you should have never talked with the bride about the DVD/CD in the first place as that should have been the main photographers problem.</p>

[theresa_skutt]

<p>Raymond hit it on the head. You're a sub-contractor, and your employer should deal with the client.</p>

[natalie_l]

<p>Thank you Raymond. It was my belief that since my contract was with the primary and I satisfied the terms of the contract that I had done everything I should. I did not sign the contract with the primary and the bride. I had a separate contract with the primary.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone!</p>

[ianivey]

<p>To follow up on a point David mentioned: a letter from a lawyer likely is a threat of a lawsuit. In most jurisdictions, if you "are being sued," you will be formally<em> served</em> a copy of the complaint filed with the court, and it will name the court at the top of the complaint. So if the letter is from a lawyer and addressed to you, it probably does not mean you are <em>currently </em>"being sued," but rather that the lawyer wants to communicate a threat of a lawsuit to you to persuade you to do or give the bride what she wants.</p>

<p>Carefully read the letter you received to see whether it <em>threatens </em>a lawsuit, or is a legal filing in a court, known as a "complaint," which actually starts a lawsuit.</p>

<p>Your lawyer (you should retain one) will likely communicate with the bride's lawyer, and demand a copy of, for example, any contract or agreement the bride might have with <em>you </em>(i.e., which you signed) which could be the basis of a suit against you by the bride. If no such agreement exists, then your lawyer will probably work with the bride's lawyer to ensure that any suit she files includes only appropriate parties.</p>

<p>To your initial consultation with a lawyer, be sure you bring everything related to the matter, including:</p>

<ol>

<li>your written agreement with the photographer; </li>

<li>print-outs of all written and email correspondence you've had with the photographer including invoices you've sent and payments you've received; </li>

<li>a list and very short description of phone conversations you've had with the photographer about this matter;</li>

<li>any written/email correspondence with the bride;</li>

<li>a list and brief description of your phone conversation(s) with the bride;</li>

<li>any agreement you had with the bride;</li>

<li>a print-out of this thread; and </li>

<li>a disc containing the photos you took at that wedding. </li>

</ol>

<p>It is very upsetting to be threatened with a lawsuit. Indeed, that reaction is one of the bride's lawyer's most powerful weapons. But retain a lawyer, let him or her look over your materials, and although you'll be poorer by several hundred dollars, you'll very likely find significant reassurance in what your lawyer tells you about how things will proceed.</p>

<p>Incidentally, this is why any time I am a sub-contractor I include in my contract a clause requiring the principal contractor to indemnify me against any lawsuit or claim by any party pertaining to the contract. That way, I can (basically) send my lawyer's invoice to the principal rather than having to pay it myself.</p>

[natalie_l]

<p>Thank you Ian, I will definitely do so.</p>

[b._psyentific]

<p>Why would she hire a lawyer for a disc apparently worth only $300 or nothing since the OP said she would just give away the disc for free? A lawyers fee is surely more than $300. She must be friends with this lawyer or something because who would go through all that trouble for a measly disc worth a lot less than the fees associated with the process. <br>

On top of that what would she be suing for? Images or money or both? What charges could possibly be filed? A reasonable judge would not award any money for the parts of a contract that were successfully fulfilled. <br>

This sounds so ridiculous. Suing over $300. Just tell the primary photographer to give her the disc and go back to counting the money the two of you have already made.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>B -</p>

<p>She can sue for whatever she (bride) wants to... The courts are crowded to the point of breaking with frivolous and merit-less lawsuits. </p>

<p>We are getting bits and pieces of information - such as who the contract (original) was between (2 photographers - not 2nd shooter and bride) and what was promised to whom. </p>

<p>Keep in mind that a verbal agreement is still an enforceable contract - as long as value is obtained by both parties... In this case - it appears that the photographer agreed to provide a CD of images to the bride - the bride may or may not have agreed to allow the photographer (Natalie) to continue to use the images in her portfolio in return for the CD. We don't know. We do know or can assume that Natalie agreed to provide the images for free (no cash). </p>

<p>So Natalie sends the images on cd to the primary photographer - why? haven't figured that one out yet - If I agree to send images to a client - they go right to the client. My guess is that she didn't want to seem like she was infringing on the primary's business. Primary decides to hold the bride up a bit and says "I've got the images - you'll get them when I get a check for $xxx.xx" Bride says - "But she agreed to GIVE them to me." Bride calls family lawyer - family lawyer drafts a letter threatening lawsuit - fires like a shotgun - wide pattern not too accurate, but who cares - it's a shotgun! </p>

<p>Lawyer at this point doesn't care who he can sue, or not sue - he's just sending a shot across the bow - saying that if his client doesn't get the photos - he'll find someone that he can sue. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[jc5066]

<p>First and foremost; you need a lawyer, that I am not.<br>

I can tell you that your first mistake was dealing with the bride. She is not, was not, and never will be your client. She was someone elses client who you happened to work for.<br>

Being she was never your client you should have never had communications with her. A polite response of you will have to go through "Joe Photographer" for those images would have been about the only proper response. You should have turned around and dealt with "Joe Photographer" your self.</p>

<p>Being she was never your client a certified letter stating that may be appropriate. You may want to state that any problems with images or lack of should be dealt with through who she has contracted.</p>

[aimee_pieters]

<blockquote>

<p>I was given permission by the photographer to use these images in my portfolio: both online and print.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Maybe someone can help me understand this. Aside from the photographer's permission, did the Bride & Groom give you permission to post their images and use them in your portfolio? This may be what they are going to leverage you with. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think that the photographer can extend his/her image release to you on behalf of his/her client.</p>

[craig_gillette]

<p>"Releases" often have language dealing with the ability of the photographer or organization to assign the rights. It's going to depend on the terms of the contract the prime photographer has with the couple. Even that is limited to being able to use (if in the contract), the images of the people signing the contract.</p>

[jc5066]

<p>You don't need permission to use an image in your portfolio.</p>

[JRCrowe]

<p>Natalie, You may want to try calling the brides attorney and explain the situation and your relationship to the principal photographer. He may not be aware of your contractor status. It might be good to have a copy of your contract with the principal photographer handy. It could save you the expense of an attorney. The attorney may be a reasonable person to deal with. If the conversation starts to go bad it will give you an idea as to whether you will need your own attorney. You could always try crying too!</p>

[natalie_l]

<p>One of my close friends is an atty in NYC (thankfully) and he helped me out. The contract between the bride and primary photography permitted the primary's company to use the images for commercial purposes. I worked as a sub-contractor and also had additional documentation granting me permission to use the images as well.<br>

Thanks to everyone for your help! I am relieved!</p>