Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Manhattan judge says photographer can distribute Russian tennis player's topless pictures
Newsday.com ^ | July 19, 2005, 8:07 PM EDT | Larry Neumeister

Posted on 07/20/2005 12:53:29 PM PDT by Ignatz

NEW YORK -- A Russian tennis player and French Open winner cannot stop a New York photographer from distributing topless pictures taken of her during a magazine photo session in the summer of 2002, a federal judge says.

Anastasia Myskina was 20 years old when the photographs were taken by Mark Seliger, according to facts outlined in a written decision by U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey in Manhattan.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: lawsuit; photos; tennis; topless; whatnopictures
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last
To: GunnyHartman

Nice abs.


21 posted on 07/20/2005 1:04:00 PM PDT by TheBigB (My train of thought is still boarding at the station.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GunnyHartman
OK...so how much do we have to pay Seliger to not publish them. ;)
22 posted on 07/20/2005 1:04:26 PM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("Some people are like gravy, spilled on God's Sunday shirt..." -- Spock's Beard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ignatz

See post #5.


23 posted on 07/20/2005 1:04:29 PM PDT by July 4th (A vacant lot cancelled out my vote for Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TheBigB
Very high disappointment factor here. Very high
24 posted on 07/20/2005 1:04:38 PM PDT by Fierce Allegiance (This ain't your granddaddy's America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GunnyHartman

Close enough, Gunny ~ Thanks! :)


25 posted on 07/20/2005 1:04:43 PM PDT by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance

It's the the headline, isn't it? I knew it. ;o)


26 posted on 07/20/2005 1:05:54 PM PDT by TheBigB (My train of thought is still boarding at the station.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: TheBigB

Well, YEAH!


27 posted on 07/20/2005 1:06:27 PM PDT by Fierce Allegiance (This ain't your granddaddy's America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance

Heh, heh...


28 posted on 07/20/2005 1:07:17 PM PDT by TheBigB (My train of thought is still boarding at the station.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale

She's breathtaking.

Skinny for sure, but a radiant beauty.


29 posted on 07/20/2005 1:07:33 PM PDT by SBprone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TheBigB
Eye wash:


30 posted on 07/20/2005 1:07:53 PM PDT by Fierce Allegiance (This ain't your granddaddy's America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro; Fierce Allegiance; TheBigB

Dang.


31 posted on 07/20/2005 1:08:22 PM PDT by Constitution Day (I am the Sultan of Oom-Papa-Mow-Mow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GunnyHartman

The topless shot with all the makeup just destroys her looks. Without all that schlock makeup and lighting and goofy posing she is a major babe.


32 posted on 07/20/2005 1:10:26 PM PDT by SBprone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance

Anna, on the other hand, looks better with makeup.


33 posted on 07/20/2005 1:11:37 PM PDT by SBprone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SBprone
Anna, on the other hand, looks better with makeup period.
34 posted on 07/20/2005 1:12:57 PM PDT by Fierce Allegiance (This ain't your granddaddy's America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: highball; July 4th
She should have better representation at the time, to be sure, but the fact that the confusing written agreement was in clear conflict with the very simple verbal agreement ought to tell us something about her intentions.


35 posted on 07/20/2005 1:13:49 PM PDT by Ignatz (Gravity: It's not just a good idea, it's the law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: highball
She appears to have been taken advantage of, signing an agreement in a foreign language that contradicted the clear verbal agreement. She should have better representation at the time, to be sure, but the fact that the confusing written agreement was in clear conflict with the very simple verbal agreement ought to tell us something about her intentions. Letter of the law over its spirit. I'm also not sure that the photographer's agreeing to a verbal contract that contradicts the written one isn't fraud.

It's pretty well-established law that written contracts supercede and void any verbal ones. Taking the terms of an agreement someone signed over the terms claimed in a verbal agreement is a no brainer.

A verbal contract is not worth the paper it's printed on.

SD

36 posted on 07/20/2005 1:19:27 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SBprone

She looks like Cher, BEFORE all the plastic surgery to fix the ugly. I don't conder that "breathtaking", more like "upchucking".


37 posted on 07/20/2005 1:21:27 PM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

I'm not really disagreeing with you. I believe in laws. I'm just not sure that she wasn't taken advantage of due to her language problem. The judge didn't think so, but I don't always trust their, um, judgment.

If she was assured that the pictures could only be used for one purpose, and that is admitted by all parties, I'd call it a "verbal rider" to the written contract. Don't think I'm somehow advocating an overthrow of contract law with that statement.


38 posted on 07/20/2005 1:25:21 PM PDT by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: highball
I'm not really disagreeing with you. I believe in laws. I'm just not sure that she wasn't taken advantage of due to her language problem.

I'm sure that was part of the problem, but that's not really an excuse. She's 20 years old, right? That's old enough that she should know what she is signing and should know that written contracts rule. Most even explicitly state that they contain the entire agreement and there are no verbal or side agreements.

If she isn't smart enough to know these things, someone in her employ should be.

(Personally, I think GQ should never use someone like this, if this is how he handles their assignments.)

SD

39 posted on 07/20/2005 1:28:44 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
If she isn't smart enough to know these things, someone in her employ should be.

Exactly. That's why I said she should have had better representation - at the very least, her agent or manager should have either reviewed the contract or referred it to someone familiar with the language. I'm surprised that a professional athlete wouldn't have somebody like that with her at the shoot.

(Personally, I think GQ should never use someone like this, if this is how he handles their assignments.)

Also agreed. The photog may be technically correct on the legality, but there was at the very least an intent to mislead her. Pretty slimy.

40 posted on 07/20/2005 1:32:13 PM PDT by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson