Adam Maas wrote: >http://www.danheller.com/model-release-primer.html > >Dan Heller is an expert on Photography Business issues.
Seems like a photographer rather than a lawyer, but he's definitely right about this: *Intent* is crucial. Unless the plaintiffs can prove that, Virgin is pretty safe. (At least in Australian courts, I'd wager: If the truly frivolous action against Virgin U.S. is allowed to continue there'll be a big out-of-court settlement. Which is the goal of the whole exercise, really.) The really interesting part of the thing will be seeing if they can con the judge into keeping Creative Commons and the U.S. arm of Virgin in the suit, because that's where the money lies and the plaintiffs know it. Can any of our Aussie list members tell us if the Australian legal system make losers pay the costs of lawsuits, like in the UK? The inclusion of Virgin's US division in this suit makes me suspect the answer to that question... :) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
