Pearl Drummers Forum

Pearl Drummers Forum (http://www.pearldrummersforum.com/index.php)
-   Chit-Chat (http://www.pearldrummersforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=36)
-   -   Suicide girls - An Interesting Read (http://www.pearldrummersforum.com/showthread.php?t=199126)

Drum_Phil 02-13-2008 01:32 PM

Suicide girls - An Interesting Read
 
Quote:

January 29, 2008 - Los Angles, CA -- A judge with the Los Angeles Superior Court recently made a landmark ruling about the contracts between S.G. Services Inc (AKA SuicideGirls) and the models bound by SG contracts. For years models, industry insiders, and casual observers have voiced the opinion that the model releases were unlawful and overly broad, but until now those that signed it were bound by the terms.

The contracts have been changed many times but most of the model contracts posted online forbid modeling for any other "competing" site while the girls model for SG and for a period of two years after they quit SG. Some of the more popular girls are rumored to have special terms with higher payments and longer periods of exclusivity. It is still unclear what effect the ruling will have on them.

SG has a very broad definition of what a competitor is and have filed lawsuits against former contractors claiming that even single girl personality based web sites are competition to their empire of DVDs, books, magazines, radio shows, merchandise, podcasts, and touring performance troupes. In addition to suing former photographer Philip Warner (AKA Lithium Picnic) they have also blacklisted him, threatening models with lawsuits and removal from the site for working with him even for noncompetitive or portfolio projects.

So what exactly is this ruling? I'm glad you asked.

"The Court finds that, in any matters determined at trial. Plaintiff God's Girls LCC is entitled to judgment as a matter of law that each and every version of SG Services, Inc's model release, including but not limited to those attached as Exhibits to the operative Complaint on file in this exaction, are void and invalid as a matter of law, at least to the extent that the releases are intended to provide that a model is "exclusive" to SG Services, Inc. and/or to prohibit a model from modeling or otherwise providing services for God's Girls LLC."

(link provided below)

What does this mean to current and past SG models? I'm no attorney but it appears to open the floodgates for SG models to shoot for other sites if they choose.

Does this impact SG models that live outside California? Possibly. You'll need to talk to an attorney in your area, but this sets a very good precedent against the contract. While SG can not sue Godsgirls over the contract it's not clear if they can still sue the models. Many states that share California's dim view on exclusivity will likely echo this ruling and support freedom for the models.

The owners of SG take competition very seriously. In addition to the ongoing litigation with Godsgirls they have gone after the profits of former model Apnea's website apneatic.com. It appears that SG has spent over half a million dollars fighting lawsuits against perceived competitors in the past year, ironically SG has never successfully won a lawsuit.

SG was able to prevent Chad Grant from launching Deviantnation.com for almost two years by tying him up in federal and civil lawsuits at a cost of over $40,000 to Grant. The cost to the US Government in the Federal case against Grant was probably close to one million dollars. Grant prevailed in both cases.

SG site traffic and membership are reported to be declining steadily as morale and public opinion about the site continue to be affected by the owner's decisions and management choices.

Expect some big changes at SG as they spin this ruling and adapt the site to deal with the change in exclusivity. The proposed set submission system is a genius idea that could potentially save the site owners over $100,000 in photoset purchasing costs per year, and the voting system that goes along with it will allow the owners to "reward" those that stay exclusive and "punish" those that don't by not taking sets. Ex-SG model Mitsuko experienced something similar to this when she was allegedly told by Missy that they were "no longer accepting sets from Mitsuko" shortly after portfolio photos of her shot by Lithium Picnic appeared on the internet.

This explains the recent surge in limbo girls being pushed out and Missy's recent uncharacteristic willingless to let some of the girls out of their contracts.

So the more things change the more they stay the same, but any way you look at it this is a huge win for the models as well as the members of others sites who will now be able to see their favorite models in more than one place online.

Also taken from Lithiumpicnics blog:

Quote:

Hi Everyone,

This is Apnea with some not-so-happy news.

As a result of the ongoing pressure and financial losses incurred from defending against Sean Suhl of SuicideGirl's $100,000 lawsuit against Philip for shooting me for my site apneatic and the emotional stress and damage this has done to his business, Philip is taking the Lithium Picnic site offline until further notice.

I've taken it over for now so he can focus his time and resources on his case and raising funds. Please contact him at lithiumpicnic at gmail dot com if you have a paid project that you would like to discuss with him.

SG is now making the preposterous claims that they taught him photography and web design and they are going after the profits of my site.

You can read my response to their recent public statement HERE.

Someone scanned and posted the public legal documents related to the case which included his contract HERE for those of you interested in reading it.

His SG contract very specifically defined single girl sites like mine as an exception to the competition rules but now SG claims my single girl site is a competitor to their empire of over one thousand girls, books, DVDs, radio shows, merchandise, a magazine and television syndication. Entering into litigation over this is costly and takes a lot of time, thousands of dollars a month. SG knows they can outspend him 100 times over and this is likely more about breaking him and locking him into a permanent non-compete than any truth about their claims.

His studio at 1602 Ovid Street Houston TX 77007 and much of his photography gear is for sale, if you are interested in discussing a purchase please contact him at lithiumpicnic at gmail dot com.

If you have recently sent in a model application or contacted him about a shoot please be patient it's unlikely he will be shooting or working on new projects for the next several months.

If you would like to help support his defense, here are a few links:

+ Prints for Sale

+ T-shirts for Sale

+ Apnea's Auctions and Paypal Donation Link

If nothing else please help spread the word, post and link to this page.

Stay tuned for more links to auctions - we're auctioning off more clothing and props from our published and well known shoots as well as more photography gear very soon.

Philip still makes frequent posts and updates on his LiveJournal page. Thanks to everyone who has shown support over the years, especially those that have recently donated or supported us through these rocky times.

We know we are in the right and we won't give up or go away until we are able to live our lives freely and unmolested.

Stay Tuned. Spread the Truth.

Apnea


Discuss.

http://a681.ac-images.myspacecdn.com...5c700a3020.jpg

cezegg 02-13-2008 01:40 PM

i am way too lazy to read all of that, care to summarize please? haha

Drum_Phil 02-13-2008 01:42 PM

Suicide girls have sued LithiumPicnic (Ex-photographer) for breach of contract and now GodsGirls (competitor) have called SG out on their contracts. The contracts were examined in court in california and the judge ruled the contracts void in cali.

The rest is about LP vs SG.

Other states are expected to follow californias example and if the contracts are void throughout the US, LP is free.

His "breach" was actually exempted by the contract because it was a single girl, personality based site which SG say arent competition.

fatal maggot 02-13-2008 01:48 PM

this is about porn sites, right?:p

Drum_Phil 02-13-2008 01:50 PM

Actually this is about businessmen getting called out on their "unlawful" contracting practices.

Plus SG cost US taxpayers over a million in court fees for a case they lost.

SG spend millions on court cases yet they've never won a single one.

fatal maggot 02-13-2008 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drum_Phil
Actually this is about businessmen getting called out on their "unlawful" contracting practices.

Plus SG cost US taxpayers over a million in court fees for a case they lost.

SG spend millions on court cases yet they've never won a single one.

yeah I know but they are about the owners of porn sites if I'm not mistaken.

724hp 02-13-2008 01:57 PM

pics!

Drum_Phil 02-13-2008 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatal maggot
yeah I know but they are about the owners of porn sites if I'm not mistaken.

Funny how SG claim "missy" owns the site. The owner is actually a guy called Sean Suhl and he sues anyone who looks like a competitor (and loses)

fatal maggot 02-13-2008 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drum_Phil
Funny how SG claim "missy" owns the site. The owner is actually a guy called Sean Suhl and he sues anyone who looks like a competitor (and loses)

well it's quite the right to sue anyone for anything and ask a redicilous fee for it in the US. I mean I never see these kinds of things in Belgium, and rarely if any in europe.

Drum_Phil 02-13-2008 02:37 PM

They've never won a single case either.

They're currently suing Lithium Picnic for "breach of contract" even though his contract says working for single girl sites is fine. They're also claiming they own his ability to take a photo and design a website.

fatal maggot 02-13-2008 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drum_Phil
They've never won a single case either.

They're currently suing Lithium Picnic for "breach of contract" even though his contract says working for single girl sites is fine. They're also claiming they own his ability to take a photo and design a website.

the fact that they can even sue one for "owning" an ability is absurd. Maybe if he signed a contract saying that he will only use his "ability" for his company, but I don't even know whether such a contract is legal. The american justice system is a joke on how free they are to make lawsuits. It's normal he loses them, it's not normal he gets to make them. They wouldn't even be accepted over here.

Drum_Phil 02-13-2008 02:54 PM

This whole thread was about their contracts being voided in cali ;)

Clearly that points to their contracts being illegal.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. | Hosted By: URLJet.com
Pearl Corporation 2006 - The Pearl Drummer’s Forum is an extension of the Pearl US website. Some products discussed here may not be available outside the USA.