[Tuscaloosa Goldfinch]

"Aw shucks, I had my settings wrong and the pictures are all BLANK!"

Seriously, if the photographer did go and shoot the ceremony because she was ordered to do so, and then a portable hard drive crashed, would she be held legally liable because there were no shots? How can someone who is ordered by a court to perform a BUSINESS SERVICE be held liable when that service is substandard??

I ask this, because as a part time photographer, I've had a hard drive crash on me, with 2000 gorgeous shots we had just loaded onto it that day from a photo shoot lost -- forever. (sob, throw up, repeat as felt.)

[freedomwarrior998]

There would probably be liability in that circumstance. A photographer would be held to the same standard of care as other photographers in the industry and there is probably a negligence claim that could be made for lost photographs. That's part of the reason this decision is so bad.

In essence the Court is enacting a Stalinist fine system against anyone who refuses the homosexual mafia's demands.

[driftdiver]

backups are a wonderful thing