Adult material consent question!

[coloradoconsent]

Colorado

I was in the process of creating content for an adult website. After a certain amount of content had been created the process halted and I had no further involvement with this person. I find out now, that this person has launched a porn paysite featuring numerous and VERY graphic photos and video of myself featured prominently on it. I was not contacted about any details of launching the site or notified about it at all. I have also received no compensation for any income generated by the sale of my images. What is the potential for legal action?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[cyjeff]

Did you give written consent to your pictures being used?

 

[coloradoconsent]

This was over 2 years ago. I think I may have signed a document verifying my age, but I am certain I never signed anything giving her full ownership of the images and rights to use them for commercial purposes. I definitely did not enter into any kind of agreement with the company who is handling her content and sales.

 

[swalsh411]

What did you think was going to happen with these pictures and videos? Why did the " process halt"? Did you get cold feet and back out? If so, you may have surrendered any rights you might have had to the content.

 

[coloradoconsent]

Thank you for your reply. I was fully aware that the images and film would be used in conjunction with an adult paysite. However I was very clear to my "associate" that I wanted certain content only accessed by paying members and to have the ability to approve what images were used and how they were represented. I was also very clear (not on paper, this was all verbal) that I would not release the images to the distribution company until we had worked out compensation, and how freely that company could link the material through to any secondary sites for backlinking, thereby losing any shred of control over presentation. She abandoned the project (basically flaked out) and we lost touch, she then moved out of state. She then entered into some sort of agreement with the distribution company with copies of all the material we had created, leaving me not only out of the loop but not notified at all, and has apparently now turned over everything we produced together carte blanche. Some of the images were taken by me on her camera and I did a huge amount of work editing/post production work on them on my computer. They were also shot on equipment and at a location owned by another individual who is also featured in the material completely without knowledge or compensation and is also wondering about legal recourse, this being her ex who she was living with at the time). I hope that none of these gory details are offensive to anyone. Since there are a few very important things I am unclear about (ie the wording of a document I can't be sure I didn't sign, "slaps forehead") I'm trying to give as much context as I can.

Having done some reading since I posted my question I'm very discouraged. It seems that considering how broad many model release/age verification documents are I may be out of luck. This was my first time working with any kind of "release" in a modeling context. She had all the contact with the company she was producing content for and my understanding at the time was that as soon as we had finished creating the content we would negotiate with the company for usage and compensation. I am the first to admit that I am responsible for my own failure to research my rights and the legal issues involved. I am also asking for legal advice from folks here without having certain important details, like a copy of what I "may" have signed. I have a clear memory of talk about paperwork, and seeing something, (very brief) printed out. Under these circumstances I realize that the input I can receive is quite limited. So let me narrow my query:

(1.) Do I have a right to demand a copy of all paperwork the initial site has for me as a model? And yes, I am aware that I have broken the cardinal rule of never signing anything without examining it and obtaining a copy. I'm not expecting to be able to have the images removed from the many places they are now appearing.

(2.) One thing I am sure about is that I did not sign any document specifying the compensation for the material, and have not seen a dime from anything related to the images, which, considering the site's traffic stats, is in the tens of thousands. Do I have a case for challenging the legality of a document that is so one-sided (in retrospect) that no reasonable person would have agreed to it if they had known it's implications? The implication being that:

"we can post 100's of free hardcore images of you all over the internet through dozens of sites and hundreds of feeder links, accompanied by statements you have not approved and that could certainly be considered "defaming", and not only keep them up without your permission but never share a cent of the substantial profit."

Again, I know you guys get questions from people all the time with only partial information on which to base your feedback. I'm thankful for any input, however general. I also realize that "fairness" often has little relevance in the legal arena.

So yeah, I'm definitely going to be paying for this mistake the rest of my life. I'm just wondering about my options for damage control and if I can expect any sort of compensation at the very least.

 

[Banned_Princess]

how is it defaming when you posed for the hardcore pics?

most professional photographers and management, make sure the models sign a release to the images making them not yours anymore.

you cant complain you didn't know, so now they have to pay you.

 

[coloradoconsent]

"how is it defaming when you posed for the hardcore pics?

most professional photographers and management, make sure the models sign a release to the images making them not yours anymore.

you cant complain you didn't know, so now they have to pay you."

This isn't a case where a professional photographer with the company came and shot the content. This was content that I and an associate were creating on our own with the intention of marketing selective parts of it to the distribution company and agreement (verbal - like a moron) that we would both have to approve all the images and video and how they would appear in context before we released them to the distributor. She basically took every frame/video we ever produced and turned it over to them after we parted ways. I was never paid a dollar for any part of the process with the understanding that that would come after the site was launched. This is a common practice with a certain type of "amateur" site, but it also makes the whole issue more confusing.

 

[coloradoconsent]

Ironically enough I am working as a paralegal at the moment so I have been able to do quite a bit of research on my own since I found about the site 2 days ago. This also gives me the ability to both do most of the research and prep for the case.

I think you have hit the heart of the issue, that until I verify the content of the "release". I cannot really go much further. Though since I know no compensation was ever decided upon and I certainly haven't received a single dollar. I suspect that the best grounds I will have for disputing the "model release/contract" is that there was no provision for any kind of consideration or compensation. Looking at contract law in Colorado and California, the two states in question I think that that might be enough for it not to be considered binding.

Initially after reading post after post online by models in different industries all with very doom and gloom opinions on the model's rights after signing a release, I was quite discouraged. Over and over this view came up, but after looking into contract law it seems to me that the reason for their attitude is that models are often taken advantage of and intimidated by the threatening and all encompassing legal jargon that many industry contracts/releases contain. I think that these contracts are often composed to do exactly that; look scary and discourage challenge. So hopefully I have at least some avenue of recourse.

 

[Hot Topic]

If you're doing your research and prep at work, you may have something else to worry about in the near future.

 

[sharond31]

I think its getting more and more tough with time going on....
Hope you can get rid of it.

 

[quincy]

Huh?

coloradoconsent, I realize you posted your questions a month ago and that sharond31 (for some strange reason) has decided to revive it, but your questions were never really answered so here are some answers:

(1) Yes, you have the right to demand a copy of all of the paperwork you signed. The distribution company may not turn over any paperwork without a subpoena, however.

(2) Yes, you can challenge the legality of any agreement (written or oral).

Without consideration (payment for the use of your image), a court may consider any agreement that was entered into void. Without a binding contract, you would be free to revoke any consent you may have given for the use of the images. Without a written consent agreement, both your former associate and the distribution company could be held liable for using any of the images of you on their website and/or for a commercial purpose.

You should speak with an attorney in your area and go over all of the facts. This is not something you should handle on your own.

And, if you were a minor when you posed for the photos and video, a whole bunch of other issues come into play.

 

[justalayman]

=quincy;2613242]
Without consideration (payment for the use of your image), a court may consider any agreement that was entered into void.

a release is not necessarily a contract per se. It's a release, not a contract to act. It can be a unilateral statement even.

Obviously OP isn't going to know what rights s/he has until s/he gets a copy of the release and any other associated materials.

OP might be best served by going the Paris Hilton route and rather than suing to prevent the distribution (which is very difficult to enforce anyway) and negotiate for compensation.

 

[quincy]

True.

And I believe it is just compensation that coloradoconsent is looking for here. She is not, apparently, concerned about privacy rights.

A court would look at any contract/release to see if the uses of the material exceed the scope of the consent that has been granted. If it is a standard release form, there may not be included on the form any indication of what the photos/video will be used for - only that the subject agrees to allow the photographer to use the material for any purpose and in any form.

With the uses of the photos described here, that type of release could be found invalid. A court would look at the consent agreement to determine if it is too vague, too one-sided or unconscionable. When photos are to be used in a "sensitive" manner, a consent form that does not spell this out clearly could be found ineffective in protecting the publisher from liability.

Obviously, it is important to know what exactly was signed, and a review by an attorney of all of the facts is necessary. I would think, based on what coloradoconsent posted here, that she is entitled to compensation for the use of her image.

I mostly posted a response to this thread because I found sharond31's post to be gibberish

 

[BC9696]

Response

I would do the following:
File a C&D demanding documentation that gives her the right to use your images for commercial gain.
If after review the document can be argued, threaten litigation. many times the mere threat of litigation will suffice as the costs for defense are astronomical. Decide what to do thereafter.