5 photographers take Corbis to court!

[kombizz]

<b>5 photographers take Corbis to court!</b><br>

Please read <a href="http://lalettredelaphotographie.com/entries/3267/5-photographers-take-corbis-to-court?

utm_source=La+Lettre+de+la+Photographie+List&utm_campaign=f7fce7508c-

La_Lettre_de_la_Photographie_08_07_2011&utm_medium=email">this</a> to find out more!

[David_Cavan]

<p>and? What I see is essentially a press release by a lawyer (or avocat to be precise) seeking more clients - it appears that the crime is mostly that Bill Gates is American and that the digital "tsunami" is grossly unfair to French culture, or something like that.</p>

[William Kahn]

<p>Agreed. It's not a news release. It's a lawyer working on his opening statement to a jury...</p>

[andylynn]

But what's he actually suing them for? I don't know the French law but in the US I don't see anything in the article that

looks like a cause of action, except for the unnamed photographer who says they didn't pay a judgment in his favor -

that guy could sue to collect on it, but I don't see what that has to do with some others who are annoyed at Corbis

restructuring.

[john_a5]

<p>The issue appears to be that Corbis absorbed the "assets" of the French subsidiary (separate corporation) but not any of the liabilities (debts) and yet did not pay the French Corporation anything for those assets--essentially defrauding the creditors--photographers owed royalties. Closely held corporations can be held to tighter standards than if it had been an arms length transaction. That appears to be the basis of the law suit.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Maybe the article isn't very well written and that's what's going on - but from the article it looks like the only person with a complaint is the photographer who was owed money after the earlier action mentioned, and it doesn't say that that photographer is a plaintiff in this case. Nothing mentioned looks like something that was done <em>to these plaintiffs</em> without a few more dots being connected.</p>

[David_Cavan]

<p>That could be true John - that may be the basis for the suit. I think the article itself is a shameless attempt by a lawyer (imagine that!) to attract clients to the suit. Not unlike those 2am commercials working on class-action lawsuits for various drugs and industries.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>According to the article, it's not a suit. It's 5 photographers seeking an investigation and hoping it will result in criminal prosecution by the Paris District Court. </p>

<p>A civil suit by 5 photographers against Corbis (Bill Gates) would be prohibitively costly. It would be much easier to pursue monetary recourse if Corbis was first found to be engaging in illegal conduct by the state. </p>

[john_h.1]

<blockquote>

<p>.I think the article itself is a shameless attempt by a lawyer (imagine that!) to attract clients to the suit. Not unlike those 2am commercials working on class-action lawsuits for various drugs and industries.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What's wrong with advertising for clients? As long as there is a legitimate claim, particularly where aggrieved people have no realistic hope of being compensated by some big corporation, I fail to see your problem. Do you bash photographers that advertise their services too?</p>

[starvy]

<p>Why do the French hate the Americans so much?</p>

[David_Cavan]

<p>John - actually I have reached an age where I don't have a problem bashing anyone who is doing something I don't agree with. It's an advantage of being over 60 and of relatively good conscience. Lawyers often reach the top of my list - and there's so many examples to work with.</p>

<p>Seriously, I do have a problem with the legal system in most of the free world. Just because someone else has deep pockets should not mean it's acceptable to find ways to use the courts to take it for yourself. I am assuming that's what happening in this case. If not, then I'll find something else to grouse about - again, lots of material out there.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>David, doing something "because you can", and getting away with it, is usually reserved for the privileged, the rich, or the powerful. The ones "being done to" are usually the weak, the poor, and those without a voice. </p>

<p>The legal system is there to provide equitable treatment for all and is the only means which a victim can seek recourse. The alternative is to take the law into ones own hands. </p>

<p>It would turn out that only perpetrators with deep pockets can adequately compensate victims for their wrong doing since most civil torts actually do incalculable harm to victims and to society. </p>

<p>If it is found that Corbis defrauded thousands of photographers, each out of small amounts of money totalling huge amounts, I would have no problem with victims seeking moral, ethical, legal, and punitive damages multiple times that amount in civil court, in addition to criminal prosecution by the state. </p>

<p>Just because your name is BP, Corbis, Exxon, or Union Carbide, shouldn't mean you are therefore above the law. </p>

[David_Cavan]

<p>Whatever - I'm sure the evil corporations are out to get the little guys here, and the lawyers are the heroes. What a tiring refrain that becomes.</p>

[john_h.1]

<blockquote>

<p>I don't have a problem bashing anyone... ...I am assuming... ...lots of material out there...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That explains things adequately.</p>

 

[David_Cavan]

<p>Yep. For me too.</p>

[mark_onat]

<p>When you find an agency that isn't ripping photographers off these days, you let me know.</p>