She declined to sign the model release, which legally prevented both the photographer, and Chipole’ from using her likeness in advertising. i.e. they did not have the LEGAL right to use it, to chose to anyway.
Some Guy,
Maybe you have detail from another story but is a bit of a leap to go from “As she was leaving, she says a photographer approached her and asked her to sign a release regarding photos he had taken.
Caldwell says she saw the image of her years later on the walls of Chipotle restaurants in Florida and California.” to she declined to sign the release. If that is in fact the case then I agree with you but do not see that anywhere in the detailed-LOL article.
Although we can infer she did not sign the release (her claim is that they used the photograph without her permission), it is not expressly written in the article so while I see where mrbob is coming from, I tend to agree with Some Guy here.
You are right. In other stories they report she refused to sign and the ad was edited so her hair color was different and bottles of alcohol were added to her table.
January 17, 2017 at 11:49 am
Some Guy says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
There’s this ability called “search” with the internet.
Here’s the link to article on Petapixel regarding the lawsuit. It notes that, while the $2B is a bit excessive, Chipolte is definitely on the hook for using an image without a proper release form.
Some Guy,
Thanks for the additional information. Had you provided even a statement that other sources had indicated this fact in the first place, I would not have questioned your post.
January 13, 2017 at 3:41 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
I disagree. If I was used in an ad by a company try to make money without my permission I would sue too.
It said she was leaving, that would mean she was in a public space and anyone can photograph you while in public. Now use in an ad do not know that law. Look at travel brochure and does everyone on the beach need to sign a release?
Spot on, Retired UW. I satirically ask: Why stop at $2.2 Billion, if this case has so much merit? Why not go for $200 Billion? This is sheer silliness and greed beyond comprehension, nicely enabled & encouraged by the personal injury bar. Society is going you-know-where in a handbasket, with folks like the plaintiff and her legal counsel at the steering wheel.
Actually, 2.2billion is absurd……laughable really. Chipotle should hand this over to their ad agency and tell them to handle it. What would the cost of a model have been…..$5,000 ?
The issue remains, where are her injuries, and more importantly the public harm or the public need to stop this rampant picture taking and use??. Making public policy and raising the price of my lunch should NOT be made by greedy individuals or their lawyers individuals. Use a little common sense, which appears to be totally absent here.
Could not agree with you more. Why is it that the plaintiff bar keeps demanding such ridiculous awards, oh I know why due to the fact that juries will award them. I have no love of the plaintiff bar but until the people of this country realize that there are costs to all of society as part of the awards the courts will continue to be tied up with trials of this level of stupidity.
Most people would be flattered to see themselves in an unexpected place. Only in California would someone be so greedy as to sue for the pleasure.
She declined to sign the model release, which legally prevented both the photographer, and Chipole’ from using her likeness in advertising. i.e. they did not have the LEGAL right to use it, to chose to anyway.
Some Guy,
Maybe you have detail from another story but is a bit of a leap to go from “As she was leaving, she says a photographer approached her and asked her to sign a release regarding photos he had taken.
Caldwell says she saw the image of her years later on the walls of Chipotle restaurants in Florida and California.” to she declined to sign the release. If that is in fact the case then I agree with you but do not see that anywhere in the detailed-LOL article.
Although we can infer she did not sign the release (her claim is that they used the photograph without her permission), it is not expressly written in the article so while I see where mrbob is coming from, I tend to agree with Some Guy here.
You are right. In other stories they report she refused to sign and the ad was edited so her hair color was different and bottles of alcohol were added to her table.
There’s this ability called “search” with the internet.
Here’s the link to article on Petapixel regarding the lawsuit. It notes that, while the $2B is a bit excessive, Chipolte is definitely on the hook for using an image without a proper release form.
https://petapixel.com/2017/01/06/woman-sues-chipotle-2-billion-using-photo-without-consent/
Some Guy,
Thanks for the additional information. Had you provided even a statement that other sources had indicated this fact in the first place, I would not have questioned your post.
I disagree. If I was used in an ad by a company try to make money without my permission I would sue too.
Did she sign or not sign the release? It doesn’t say.
It said she was leaving, that would mean she was in a public space and anyone can photograph you while in public. Now use in an ad do not know that law. Look at travel brochure and does everyone on the beach need to sign a release?
If your face is recognizable or you can otherwise be identified, they must get your release.
OK, fine. She can sue.
But, where’s the damage? Where’s the injury?
This is worth around $5,000, tops. Lawyer gets 40%. Big whoopee…
Spot on, Retired UW. I satirically ask: Why stop at $2.2 Billion, if this case has so much merit? Why not go for $200 Billion? This is sheer silliness and greed beyond comprehension, nicely enabled & encouraged by the personal injury bar. Society is going you-know-where in a handbasket, with folks like the plaintiff and her legal counsel at the steering wheel.
How did you come to your $5k figure and how does that hold Chipotle accountable in any real way? I think her amount is way too high but $5k is absurd.
Actually, 2.2billion is absurd……laughable really. Chipotle should hand this over to their ad agency and tell them to handle it. What would the cost of a model have been…..$5,000 ?
Heck, they are paying the CEO only about $20,000,000!
The issue remains, where are her injuries, and more importantly the public harm or the public need to stop this rampant picture taking and use??. Making public policy and raising the price of my lunch should NOT be made by greedy individuals or their lawyers individuals. Use a little common sense, which appears to be totally absent here.
Wild Bill
Could not agree with you more. Why is it that the plaintiff bar keeps demanding such ridiculous awards, oh I know why due to the fact that juries will award them. I have no love of the plaintiff bar but until the people of this country realize that there are costs to all of society as part of the awards the courts will continue to be tied up with trials of this level of stupidity.