Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,699   Posts: 1,482,567   Online: 886
      
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 61
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Just north of the Inferno
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    750
    Images
    27
    I saw this article and it got me thinking...


    Judge Seals Cameron Diaz Modeling Photos
    Tue Aug 5, 7:03 AM ET


    SANTA MONICA, Calif. - Photographs of Cameron Diaz (news) taken at a private modeling session about a decade ago, before she was a star, were ordered sealed by a judge.


    Judge Alan Haber ordered the photos and a videotape sealed Monday, saying Diaz has a right to privacy of her own body. He set a Sept. 12 hearing in Superior Court on her request for an injunction against photographer John Rutter.


    Diaz, a co-star of the two "Charlie's Angels" films, wasn't present at the hearing. Afterward, lawyers for the 30-year-old actress and Rutter wouldn't discuss the contents of the videotape.


    Diaz didn't sign a photo release, and a release produced by Rutter is a forgery, her publicist, Brad Cafarelli, said last month.


    No criminal charge has been filed against Rutter.


    Rutter's lawyer, Michael H. Weiss, declined comment Monday. Diaz's lawyer, Paul Berra, didn't return a phone call for comment.


    The photographer told the syndicated news program "Inside Edition" in mid-July that he'd contacted Diaz's lawyers to offer them the photos before he sold them to any media outlets.


    "This was a negotiation for a right of first refusal with Cameron Diaz's lawyers," Rutter said. "A few hours after her lawyers offered to buy the photos my place was raided."


    The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office confirmed that Rutter's apartment had been searched. The warrant was issued in an investigation "involving an incident where Cameron Diaz is the alleged victim," said spokeswoman Jane Robison.
    Now, here is what I am thinking (O.k. besides, "Can I see?"):

    How can the cops legally raid this guy when the question is about a model release?

    First off there IS a release. Diaz's people say it is a fake. Secondly, the guy made a legit offer. They did get the right of first refusal. Now, this guy is probably no saint, but I am wondering here what warrants the cops raiding your place because of some confusion regarding a model release?

    Any insight here? Or is it a case of fame buying muscle?
    Official Photo.net Villain
    ----------------------
    [FONT=Comic Sans MS]DaVinci never wrote an artist's statement...[/FONT]

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    The basis for a search of the premises is open to conjecture at this point. Obviously there is a lot of blame being placed by both sides. In order for the police to have conducted a search (if it's legal and I'd bet that it is) the judge would have been presented compelling evidence by the attorneys for the plaintiff that would have caused the judge to consider that to disregard a search request would have placed the plaintiff at an enhanced point of risk. Beyond that who knows?
    Art is a step from what is obvious and well-known toward what is arcane and concealed.

    Visit my website at http://www.donaldmillerphotography.com

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,627
    Images
    154
    I'm assuming that their was nudity involved. And I have to say that the person that was photgraphed should always have the right of refusal. To go to them and try to extort money is desporate and unethical. I've photographed the nude for 15 years now and always gotten a signed release from the model. Yet if I decide to publish an image shot 12 years ago we always contact the person first and if they say no, it "is" frustraiting, but it's no different than a relationship heading to be sexual then one of the partners deciding at the last second to back out. It has to be respected! In Camorens case she is a public figure and needs to respect/protect her future. The truth is if the image/film was so important then Rutter could have re-done it with a willing person, so I'm guessing that his real motivation was simply to cash in on her celebrity status. If that is true and their agreement is not mutal then he has brought this on himself.
    Stop trying to get into my mind, There is nothing there!

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Just north of the Inferno
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    750
    Images
    27
    My concern is that Rutter IS saying he offered first refusal, and that he is saying he has a release.

    Does that warrant cops invading his home/workplace?
    Official Photo.net Villain
    ----------------------
    [FONT=Comic Sans MS]DaVinci never wrote an artist's statement...[/FONT]

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Kennedy
    My concern is that Rutter IS saying he offered first refusal, and that he is saying he has a release.

    Does that warrant cops invading his home/workplace?
    It is one thing to contend a fact not yet entered into the courts determination and another to have the court rule on the validity of that contention.
    Art is a step from what is obvious and well-known toward what is arcane and concealed.

    Visit my website at http://www.donaldmillerphotography.com

  6. #6

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    336
    I agree with Robert, it worries me that the course of action was to raid the place, after Cameron's lawyers agreed to pay. In other words, they didn't even try . . ."no, please." And exhortion "coverage" if that is what it was, should be extended to everyone and usually no one gets police interruption until after a crime is committed so to speak or it is clear one is about to be committed. Hmmm, maybe they thought the pics of Cameron could be considered weapons of mass destruction. Tee hee. :grin:
    Embrace **it! **it. . .just another name for fertilizer. . . Grow baby Grow!

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,627
    Images
    154
    I can't quote law, locally their was an incident where a photgrapher photgraphed a mother and young daughter together, the lab he took the film to called the authorities, they raided, taking film, prints and computer systems, essentially putting this studio out of buisiness for 8 months until the case was dropped with no appoligies. In dispute was the age of the young daughter being unable to give consent. This took a wonderful situation and ruined it. As far as Cameron is concerned we don't know how high the photographers demands were or his attitude in dealing with the actress. It could have been considered harrassment. her body and mind is her market and she has every right to protect herself from his " weapons of mass distruction" to her career. We can discuss legal semantics all day long but the truth is we have responsibilities to the people we work with. To satisfy our concepts and our pocketbooks we need to cultivate good will and reward their participation, not use it to extort.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Kennedy
    My concern is that Rutter IS saying he offered first refusal, and that he is saying he has a release.

    Does that warrant cops invading his home/workplace?
    Worse thing he could have done. Now it sounds like extortion. Think about it. Somebody phones you up

    " I've got naked pictures of you. Give me money or you'll see them in the papers"

    I'm not saying that's what he did but it wouldn't take very much for a good lawyer to get the police to look at it like that. He then is in the position of proving his innonence.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    958
    The standards, at least in theory, for a magistrate to issue a search warrant are fairly stringent. Wonder if the lawyers had a tape of an extortion attempt by the photographer? If so, there should have been sufficient cause to arrest him, as well.
    Very strange; I'll guess we'll find out on Sept. 12. Inquiring minds want to know...

  10. #10
    Eric Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Calgary AB, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,209
    Images
    73
    I would suspect it's all about money. She has it, and he doesn't. Therefore she has power and he doesn't. Hence she gets sympathetic treatment from suits. If they make a mistake she has enough money to make it go away, if they didn't then they are heros.

    On the other hand if he didn't have a release then he's an idiot.
    www.ericrose.com
    yourbaddog.com

    "civility is not a sign of weakness" JFK

    "The Dude abides" - the Dude

Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin