Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Photography Business
DJ Sparks Outcry From Photographers After Shooting and Sharing Wedding Photos
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Horoscope Fish" data-source="post: 490372" data-attributes="member: 13090"><p>DJ is, IMO anyway, clearly a d-bag of the first and highest order. We all know what he was doing and, just as apparently, NOT doing and we can all see why. For him to pretend he was doing otherwise is just sophomoric. </p><p></p><p>So, the question then becomes, was d-bag legally in the clear doing what he did and I can't see why he <em>wouldn't</em> be... </p><p></p><p>The B&G hired a photographer and a DJ, not a photographer and a competing photographer. The Photographer hired by the B&G clearly had an exclusivity clause in her contract but the contract was with the B&G who, once again, hired only one photographer and a DJ. What d-bag DJ/photographer wannabe did of his own volition pretty much sucks all the way around IMO, but I don't see anything anyone could do about it except leave him a scathing Yelp! review because being a d-bag is not illegal. I at least hope the B&G are happy.</p><p><span style="color: #FFFFFF">....</span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Horoscope Fish, post: 490372, member: 13090"] DJ is, IMO anyway, clearly a d-bag of the first and highest order. We all know what he was doing and, just as apparently, NOT doing and we can all see why. For him to pretend he was doing otherwise is just sophomoric. So, the question then becomes, was d-bag legally in the clear doing what he did and I can't see why he [I]wouldn't[/I] be... The B&G hired a photographer and a DJ, not a photographer and a competing photographer. The Photographer hired by the B&G clearly had an exclusivity clause in her contract but the contract was with the B&G who, once again, hired only one photographer and a DJ. What d-bag DJ/photographer wannabe did of his own volition pretty much sucks all the way around IMO, but I don't see anything anyone could do about it except leave him a scathing Yelp! review because being a d-bag is not illegal. I at least hope the B&G are happy. [COLOR="#FFFFFF"]....[/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Photography Business
DJ Sparks Outcry From Photographers After Shooting and Sharing Wedding Photos
Top