news.com.com— An Ohio woman is demanding $20 million from Yahoo for allegedly using a photo of her without her permission for a welcome e-mail sent to new users.
Mar 2, 2007View in Crawl 4
That's my take on the matter...she signed a release when she did the modeling. Sorry, you already cashed in on that photo for $50 and signed your rights away. She should be happy that it isn't pr0n from her "modelling" days being sent to 20 million users.
I dunno, I think she's entitled to the $20 million, after all camera's do steal your soul, how much is your soul really worth? $20mil. Google it if yee doubt the claim.
i thought they used stock copyrighted stuff, that was stupid for a huge company to do without checking first. it would of been easier to hire a model for the same purpose.
@Anonymous99She's not spending ten million on legal fees, silly. Her lawyer's doing this on contingency. The actual cost to her is nothing, the direct cost to the lawyer is a couple thousand, but if they win then rest assured, there will be itemized bills totaling ten million and the lawyer gets 30 - 40%.
switch22Mar 3, 2007
Rebel against the comment system
tomaroccoMar 4, 2007
That's my take on the matter...she signed a release when she did the modeling. Sorry, you already cashed in on that photo for $50 and signed your rights away. She should be happy that it isn't pr0n from her "modelling" days being sent to 20 million users.
audiowizardMar 4, 2007
I dunno, I think she's entitled to the $20 million, after all camera's do steal your soul, how much is your soul really worth? $20mil. Google it if yee doubt the claim.
rowlodgeMar 4, 2007
i thought they used stock copyrighted stuff, that was stupid for a huge company to do without checking first. it would of been easier to hire a model for the same purpose.
wamattMar 4, 2007
I highly doubt that. No mention of it on their WP entry. <a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folgers">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folgers</a> 100m is a pretty significant event.Google search brings up no hard evidence either.
kazisdamanMar 4, 2007
whaaA!
humptydankMar 4, 2007
@Anonymous99She's not spending ten million on legal fees, silly. Her lawyer's doing this on contingency. The actual cost to her is nothing, the direct cost to the lawyer is a couple thousand, but if they win then rest assured, there will be itemized bills totaling ten million and the lawyer gets 30 - 40%.
ekatsumataJun 2, 2007
It wasn't Folgers, and it wasn't for $100m. It was Taster's Choice, and more like $15.6m.