Too often, stock photographers worry unnecessarily about the possibility of ending up in court as a result of their photography. The worry is fueled by journalists who will too often fan the fires of a photography suit without reporting the final outcome: a dismissal of the case or a settlement out of court.
In reality, photographers seldom get sued. And the rare times that they are, the case usually ends up targeting not the photographer, but the publisher who used the picture, either unwittingly or purposefully, in a wrongful manner.
And why aren't photographers sued? Because they don't have deep pockets. Attorneys know it is wasted time to go after a target whose assets are minimal. Even if someone has an ironclad case against you and a 100% chance of winning the case, they probably won't pursue a suit if in their "asset search" they discover their attorney's fees would be spent more wisely in a different direction.
Armed with this information, photographers who are intent on capturing the world around them on film should be less timid in pursuing their mission.
HINT: According to Carole A. Lane, author of the recently published book, "Naked In Cyberspace, How To Find Personal Information On-line," persons of wealth make a practice of investing their assets into their home equity, which in most states, is protected by Homestead Law. (PEMBERTON PRESS, 462 Danbury Road, Wilton CT 06897-2126; (203) 761-1466 Fax: (203) 761-1444; Email: johnb@onlineinc.com)
|
International Home Page |
 
|