Replies

When it got all slow, I was just gonna post to you that I must've been wrong when I thought they disputed that it was really Amber's signature. From the little that has been said of the details, I now gather that Amber's side is saying it wasn't a release she signed, but just a "data sheet", which would just be her giving information--would not be a release or contract.

And if Amber did do a valid contract with that photographer, who later sold his business, wonder if Amber's agreement with HIM is transferable to someone else? Amber's team could argue that whatever contract she may have signed with the photographer, that the present owners of his business don't have privity of contract as to her contract with the photog.

I mean, if I sign a contract with you, does that mean you can just sell it to whomever you wish, and I am obligated to THEM under the contract? I don't think so!

...unless, of course, the contract SPECIFIED that it could be assigned by the photographer to someone else.

How about Amber's side of the contract? In a contract, each side is obligated to do something for the other. Does this mean that Amber could go get her friend Helen Thomas, and say, "Here, I've decided to sell my part of this contract to Helen here, so SHE'LL be the one posing for you"? (Boy, that photographer suddenly wouldn't be getting his money's worth!)

I think in the sale of a business, especially photography, items like pictures and contracts, agreements, for such pictures, come under "intellectual property". I believe Schmidt has his ducks in a row on this one. JMO