----- Original Message ----- From: "P. J. Alling"
Subject: Re: Ugly event terms for photographers - What do you think?
Simple tort law William, a valid contract requires a meeting of the mind's. There can be no meeting of the minds here. I wasn't advocating taking them to court. Their "contract" cannot stand up. I was expecting them to threaten court action when I ignored their "contract" at which time I'd have a real lawyer explain the difficulty to them. I doubt after they consulted their own lawyer it would get that far.
The meeting of the minds is when you willingly click the link that says you agree to abide by their rules. The "valuable consideration" is the privledge of photographing their event. Is it a fair agreement? I don't especially think so. Would it stand up in court? It would depend on who had the most money to throw at it and whether the judge thought that an agreement is an agreement, rather than a point to start after the fact negotiations. Do I think it fair to agree to something with the intention, after the fact, to arbitrarily break an agreement simply because it wasn't as well written as it could have been and because you figure you can get away with it? I'm one of the people who thinks this is mostly what is wrong with the world. If events are private and are being held on private property, the event owner pretty much gets to make his own rules as he sees fit, and the general public has the right to either agree with said rules and abide by them, disagree with said rules and abide by them, or diagree with the rules and stay away. At least that's how it works in my world, your world seems to be in a different galaxy from mine.
William Robb
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
