Ask DrewDevil your legal questions

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What legal consequences could there be if I posted pictures of an ex-gf in a forum or somewhere on the Internet and she stumbled upon them? Some pictures were sent to me via e-mail by her and some are taken myself with my cell phone, if that matters.

I'm sure I know what everyone else's reply is going to be, but I'm interested in DrewDevil's reply. I always thought I could get in trouble for doing something like this, but maybe I'm an idiot?

[/ QUOTE ]


The law here is pretty murky and there will probably be some lawsuits about this in the future, but right now, generally speaking...

If you took the pictures, you own the copyright to them, so you can probably post them anywhere you want.

If she took the pics and sent them to you... eh, not sure. As long as you're not trying to use them to profit, you're probably still okay.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would argue that the pictures you took and then posted would probably constitute an invasion of privacy. The ex gf probably consented to you taking the pictures which were done in a private setting (I assume). At that point, you and her have a tacit agreement that the two of you share in the privacy of the photos. She would have to give express consent for you to be authorized to publicize the photos to a forum beyond the two of you.

So, technically, without her consent to publicize, you own the photo, but you do not own the rights to do whatever you want with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said earlier, I think the content of the photo is a pretty key fact - if you're hanging out in a park or on a beach, that's a very different thing than slightly more, er, candid, shots...

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What legal consequences could there be if I posted pictures of an ex-gf in a forum or somewhere on the Internet and she stumbled upon them? Some pictures were sent to me via e-mail by her and some are taken myself with my cell phone, if that matters.

I'm sure I know what everyone else's reply is going to be, but I'm interested in DrewDevil's reply. I always thought I could get in trouble for doing something like this, but maybe I'm an idiot?

[/ QUOTE ]


The law here is pretty murky and there will probably be some lawsuits about this in the future, but right now, generally speaking...

If you took the pictures, you own the copyright to them, so you can probably post them anywhere you want.

If she took the pics and sent them to you... eh, not sure. As long as you're not trying to use them to profit, you're probably still okay.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would argue that the pictures you took and then posted would probably constitute an invasion of privacy. The ex gf probably consented to you taking the pictures which were done in a private setting (I assume). At that point, you and her have a tacit agreement that the two of you share in the privacy of the photos. She would have to give express consent for you to be authorized to publicize the photos to a forum beyond the two of you.

So, technically, without her consent to publicize, you own the photo, but you do not own the rights to do whatever you want with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said earlier, I think the content of the photo is a pretty key fact - if you're hanging out in a park or on a beach, that's a very different thing than slightly more, er, candid, shots...

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed: My analysis specifically covers "private" photos. If the photo is taken in a public place, or the subject matter does not reveal anything more of the person not already public, there is no privacy right to protect.

[DarrenX]

Dear Mr. DrewDevil,

My GF and I own a salon. We have a disgruntled former employee who filed a bogus complaint to the Better Business Bureau stating we didn't get her authorization to take her uniform money out of her paycheck (we did). She wants her $75 back since she quit before she ever wore them. We need to respond to this complaint by next Monday. On principle, we refuse to give her this money back because (a) she authorized it (b) she stole money from the cash register on more than one occasion (c) stole a $200 hair dryer and (d) is a skanky ho. My question is, how should we respond to this? What happens once we respond? Does the complaint get 'removed' from public record, or is our response posted? And is there any issue in stating that she stole from us?

Thanks in advance!

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope we're not coming to the point where fatties can sue restaurants for making them fat, but I'd never rule anything out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure lawsuits of this nature have already been filed against major fast food chains. I'm not sure if any have been won by the plaintiffs. I agree it's pretty screwed up.

[RustedCorpse]

Prepaid legal services; pyramid scam? Or useful?

[VoraciousReader]

When I went out to lunch today at my favorite local Chinese hole, the owner, who is a naturalized citizen, asked me to look at her lease for her.

Basically, the lease states that the tenant has the right to place one sign on the exterior wall, subject to approval by the owner, and at the tenant's own expense. They did this when they first moved into the space.

However, a few months ago the owner of the shopping center did some exterior renovations, and took down their signage and has not returned it. It wouldn't go with the remodel. (The last sentence is my opinion.)

When she called the owner of the shopping center, he told her that she had to get a new sign and to call the sign company and that per her lease, it is at her expense. The sign company wants 5000 dollars for the new sign.

While she understood that she had to pay for the original sign, the owner initiated and desired the remodel (probably to help fill some vacant locations) and removed her sign that she was completely satisfied to keep. She doesn't think she should have to pay for the new sign.

Does she have any legal ground to require them to pay for some/all of her new sign costs?

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
When I went out to lunch today at my favorite local Chinese hole, the owner, who is a naturalized citizen, asked me to look at her lease for her.

Basically, the lease states that the tenant has the right to place one sign on the exterior wall, subject to approval by the owner, and at the tenant's own expense. They did this when they first moved into the space.

However, a few months ago the owner of the shopping center did some exterior renovations, and took down their signage and has not returned it. It wouldn't go with the remodel. (The last sentence is my opinion.)

When she called the owner of the shopping center, he told her that she had to get a new sign and to call the sign company and that per her lease, it is at her expense. The sign company wants 5000 dollars for the new sign.

While she understood that she had to pay for the original sign, the owner initiated and desired the remodel (probably to help fill some vacant locations) and removed her sign that she was completely satisfied to keep. She doesn't think she should have to pay for the new sign.

Does she have any legal ground to require them to pay for some/all of her new sign costs?

[/ QUOTE ]

IANAL, but I think grand larceny is illegal in most states.

[VoraciousReader]

I may have explained this badly, but the sign she had was mounted to the face of the building and had to be removed for the remodel. It definitely would not flatter the remodel that has been done, and I think the landlord is exercising his "right to approve the sign".

I also think he's trying to take advantage of her, however.

[J.A.K.]

Drew,
1) Do you need a retainer to answer my question?

2) Is NT!'s back-to-back banning of quickfetus anti-Semitism?

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
Drew,

Please forgive any naivete or wanton ignorance that follows, but I'm curious about these:

(1) If I'm thinking about committing a crime, can I walk into a lawyer's office and discuss the potential legal ramifications with him, and he would be "glad" to help me?

[/ QUOTE ]

The attorney-client privilege does not apply if the client communication is for the purpose of committing a crime or tort.

[ QUOTE ]
(2) Along this same line, how do you handle dealing with clients who do things you find to be morally reprehensible, if in fact you have/do have to? Is this quite common and simply part of any lawyers job?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really have to deal with this much, as I don't do criminal law. Family law certainly brings out the devil in people, but most of the time, if a client is doing something immoral, it's also illegal, and I'm not required to assist in illegal activity.

I have had to do things I find morally repugnant, such as deposing an elderly grandmother about her sex life with her husband since he contracted mesothelioma. Unfortunately, since one of her claims was for loss of consortium, I had to ask those questions. I didn't like it.

[ QUOTE ]
(3) Along this same line, has your view of human beings changed since becoming a lawyer and hearing of all the crazy things people do?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really, I have always pretty much thought of people as being capable of both stunning goodness and unspeakable evil. Being a lawyer has not changed that opinion.

[ QUOTE ]
(4) Also, can people "shop" for lawyers, as in visit with a few for a free initial consultation, in order to find one that he thinks he can work best with?

[/ QUOTE ]

The overwhelming majority of legal work in the USA is generated by referrals, but certainly there are people and companies who interview multiple lawyers and law firms before choosing them.

[ QUOTE ]
(5) If I had a legal issue concerning, say, internet law, how important would you say it is to find a lawyer that "specializes" in internet law?

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on how complex the issue is and how much money is at stake. If you are craigslist, you want the best internet law firm in the USA on retainer. If you want to draft a terms and conditions page for your blog, you can probably use a "regular" contract lawyer.

[ QUOTE ]
(6) Do you know of lawyers who "gossip" about their clients around the office, or is this completely unheard of?

Thanks!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Lawyers tend to "talk shop" around the office, so maybe they are gossiping about their cases. I don't hear a lot of gossip about clients' personal lives, but I'm sure there is plenty of that too.

I do think lawyers tend to be very careful about revealing privileged client information to non-lawyers or lawyers at other firms, or they better be.