Cycle dealer in trouble

[Joe Low]

I think CL were unlucky, they said they didnt know that she was a former Miss SA.  Seeing as publicity is her industry and livelihood, she's well aware of what's ok regarding image usage. Its surprising they couldnt reach an agreement in 3yrs - maybe they were both advised they could win.

[HowellingWulf]

I'm just glad that Actionphoto does not charge the same rate. My Sani2C pics would've cost me a somewhere north of R5,000,000.00.

[Gregzilla]

 

I'm happy to have put the post in as it is and show that i'm not indignant or playing a race "card".

I've made a point and that's all.

 

This thread has had a professional photographer and a former editor of Bicycling magazine explain clearly what the issues are and what the law says; yet a large number of people want to argue the toss and it seems strange.

 

CL used that picture as they had no other of female cyclists of colour. It kinda reinforces what I am saying.

 

The smiley shows its only the Hub and not worth getting excited about.

 

Look' date=' here's another one.

 

 

p.s. you take issue with "racist" but not "mysogynist" so you're happy to agree with me on that one?

 

 

[/quote']

 

Joe CL used that picture because they were too cheap to hire a model and that picture happened to be a picture of a former miss SA so they thought they had scored, when told of the error of their ways they refused to accept what is seemingly a pretty cut and dried case and chose to fight it in the courts, race doesnt come into it unless you live in SA and it has now become a thing of colour, in my mind this is a purely legal matter it is you raising the race card, as to misogyny I really dont think that applies here just have a look at the pages dedicated to Lolly and his girls or the Ladies and bicycles thread, I would think most males here on the hub love woman not hate them.

 

[Slowbee]

wow talk about pandora's box of worms!

 

 

[BrendonMyb]

this thread is boring

who cares about a has been ms SA & for that matter current ms SA

 

if she wants to take them to court - good for her & CL loses or wins whichever, good for them too

 

nothing has even happened yet

 

as they assumption is the mother of all....... you know what i mean

[Joe Low]

Gregzilla - fair enough point of view.

 

I reckon the Hub is not female-friendly but dont have to get into it, it's bin done a number of times before.

 

 

 

[SURFER]

 Similar situation happened a while back. Surfing magazine (SA mag) used a photo of a girl in background for an article.  Girl sued them and got R10 000. They apologised and paid.  Photo was not used for an add.

[Harry Potter]

Ag shame!! She dont seem to understand that it is by grace that she can still use her face to make bucks. I bet you before each pagent she prays to win and after she won she says thanks and then it is all about herself. how she looks and how she achieved what she did, etc, etc.

[SURFER]

More info  - she wanted R500 000

 

 

If you?ve been following the media recently, you?ll know Zigzag was sued for R500 000 over an image published of a young girl in a bikini that appeared without her consent in a 2006 photo feature.

As the hubbub dies down, we?d just like to thank you, all our readers, for your unwavering support and clarify what happened.

We accepted an image in good faith from one of our regular freelance photographers at the time. It was a photo of a girl in a bikini, facing away from the camera and walking into the water on a public beach, exactly as she had appeared.

Had we known that she was a minor or no consent had been given to the photographer, we would not have used the photo as a matter of principle. But we did not double-check this, and for that we do apologise unreservedly ? to the girl, her family, and of course our readers.

But there was absolutely no malicious intent from Zag?s side, nor did we feel that the image or the context it appeared in was derogatory or defamatory. The photo ran alongside a surf shot within a 16 page photo feature with a graphic icon saying ?100% Pure Surfing Filth? (not ?Pure Filth? as commonly reported) stamped randomly across all 16 pages. The majority of these were filled with waves, surfers ripping, and the odd beach scene. It was a generic, common surfing title for the entire photo feature and was run with the full belief it would be understood positively. The caption itself read ?All natural Eastern Cape honey (beauty)?.

It was definitely not Zag?s intent for it to be interpreted as anything ?sleazy? or something that would reflect negatively on the people portrayed. That?s not the style or tone of the feature, or our mag.

Regardless, we accept and respect the decision of the court who found in the girl?s favour, and Judge Dennis Davis has ordered Zigzag to pay R10 000 in damages.

[Gregzilla]

You see even Zig Zag had to pay damages to an unfamous minor for using a photo without her consent, now what chance does CL have in there case when they used a photo of a mrs SA for advertising purposes without her consent? they should have settled long ago before any of this came to light, and as for the sum of money she is asking for seems to be the going rate 

[Bat-ass]

Mr Andrew Mac has had his fair share of court dates lately??

[kosmonooit]

It seems a precendent has been set that such people exploit, permission, fair enough, due compenstion yet, but really the story about damaging her brand should be thrown out of court.

[Harry Potter]

It seems a precendent has been set that such people exploit' date=' permission, fair enough, due compenstion yet, but really the story about damaging her brand should be thrown out of court. [/quote'] She will have to prove that, and if she dare to mention something about CL made money because they used her face, she will have to prove that two. WTF did she do in the shop at the first place? maybe she was hopeing for someting like this, and everything worked out perfect!!

[Danger Dassie]

 Similar situation happened a while back. Surfing magazine (SA mag) used a photo of a girl in background for an article.  Girl sued them and got R10 000. They apologised and paid.  Photo was not used for an add.

 

You see even Zig Zag had to pay damages to an unfamous minor for using a photo without her consent' date=' now what chance does CL have in there case when they used a photo of a mrs SA for advertising purposes without her consent? they should have settled long ago before any of this came to light, and as for the sum of money she is asking for seems to be the going rate  [/quote']

 

Two different situations altogether with diferring legal arguments.

 

The whole reason the Zig Zag issue came to light was because they published an editorial image of a minor without the consent of the minor's legal guardian/s and they complained that the image was degrading because of the caption "pure filth"

Which in the context of surf slang is somewhat complimentary. Yet since the mag is read and available outside of the surf community it was felt that this would be miscontrued.

 

The photographer felt it was fine because the photo was taken at a public sporting event from behind and displayed no facial or recognisable features.

The mag pleaded ignorance, although the onus is on the editorial team to determin copyright, legal age, consent and/or if the image is being used in a derogative manner or out of context.

The argument from Zig Zag was a fair one, yet since this involved a minor, this more than likely swayed the courts decision.

[SteelyDan]

Hi - couldn't be bothered to read the thread - got through a few pages and it became, well, SERIOUSLY BORING!!!

 

 

 

So, who's the fat chick in pink???

 

 

 

[Racingsnail]