I didn't even understand what the lawsuit was about. What is this guy being sued for? It's quite vague about what they are accusing the photographer of.
Wedding Couple hires Photog.
Photog shoots wedding for 3800 bucks, but does so without having signed contract.
Wedding Couple requests digital images instead of prints - 'they will handle it as they have LR, etc.'
Photog gives ALL digital files collected to Wedding Couple (including outtakes, closed eye shots, blurry stuff, etc).
Wedding Couple put up photos on FB and shares with friends, lots of happy comments and good stuff said about shots.
Wedding Couple (one of them a lawyer) decide to send letter (See Juliet's post) to Photog and demand recouping all money put out for photog and more (3800 +15K for 'ruining wedding')
Wedding Couple plan to sue for 300K or more.
I enjoy the part where he says being a partner means it doesn't cost him anything to sue the guy. Uh, who's paying overhead for the practice then? The secretaries?
That has got to be one of the most unethical and unprofessional letters I have ever read! Pure bullying, no question. Let the internet viral smackdown begin!
That has got to be one of the most unethical and unprofessional letters I have ever read! Pure bullying, no question. Let the internet viral smackdown begin!
i think the first, and maybe the only, thing i would do would be to take that letter down to the washington state bar association and let them deal with it. i don't think that attorney will be "making a living suing people" much longer...
Gary hasn't posted the name of the lawyer yet and technically at this point its just a lawyer just being a bully trying to get the photog to hand money over. Once the lawyer actually puts the paper work through for the lawsuit then its all on public record at which point Gary will have no problem posting this douche's name and letting the wrath of the Internets land on the lawyers head.
I'm not a fan of suing people unless there is no alternative, but in this case I would think Nelson could counter sue for extortion, blackmail or half a dozen other things.
The threat to hire an SCO expert to smear Mr Tang's good name on the internet if he is not paid off, is the definition of extortion, and that is certainly actionable. I would be shocked given what the lawyer has written so far, if he was actually a member of the bar. If he is not, he can be jailed. If he is, he has probably done enough to be disbarred. I have seen a lot of letters threatening legal action, and they ought to be vague and menacing, not this sort of outright bullying.
If you really don't like a shooter's work, don't post hundreds of them on your Facebook. Once you post the work, how do you say it isn't usable?
As Gary pointed out Mr Tang did two things wrong.
1) He shot a wedding without a written contract. When you have a document where each of the parties spell out their obligations and sign a binding agreement to fulfill those promises, it makes the sort of legal extortion this lawyer is trying to pull, much tougher to pull off.
2) He handed over all his shots without culling the mistakes and burn frames. Even if the client wants to save a few bucks by doing the editing themselves, get rid of the duds before they leave your hands. Its bad enough that your name is going to be on whatever they do in editing, no point in giving the client shots that are of no use to them unless they want to smear you.
I have seen a lot of letters threatening legal action,...
Is there something we should know? :D
My father and brother are lawyers (mostly med-mal defense), and I'm a building contractor. I have issued and received more letters threatening legal action than I have gotten birthday cards. But it's OK, just civil court, I can be trusted around children.
I have seen a lot of letters threatening legal action,...
Is there something we should know? :D
My father and brother are lawyers (mostly med-mal defense), and I'm a building contractor. I have issued and received more letters threatening legal action than I have gotten birthday cards. But it's OK, just civil court, I can be trusted around children.
Whew! Cuz there are a lot of babies over in rant... :D (sooo kidding)
Get it right, people! He didnt ruin the wedding. He ruined the wedding memories. Obviously these poor people are experiencing temporary amnesia, that only money can rectify.
