Re: OT- Disgruntled ex employee request legal?

On Dec 18, 7:52 pm, "Nige" <nigelDOTI...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
ginge wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 18:10:33 +0000, Wicked Uncle Nigel
<w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, prawn
<sean.pr...@xxxxxxxxx> typed
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 17:18:36 +0000, Rope wrote:

<reads thread>

I would have thought he did this while and employee, so has no legal
grounds to have this image removed?

Hmmm. IANAL, but my understanding is that unless a release form has been
signed, the person in the video has /some/ rights to his own image.

Regardless of all that, the man wants his image removing after being
made redundant. It's the right thing to do.

If he'd resigned then I'd say "tough", but he's been metaphorically
kicked in the teeth by the company. The least they could do is comply
with his perfectly reasonable request,

Too right.

There is however a third option.  Reply back stating the options to
remove or modify his image as being recognisable are being looked at,
but whilst this is being looked into would he consider signing a
release for a nominal fee as compensation for any inconvenience
caused?

He might say yes, and you'll have lost nothing in asking, and it'll
probably still be cheaper than editing it..

Toss him a few quid, which he will need as he's been cruelly sacked so close
to Christmas by a heartless money grabbing ***....

you can't use the same bait twice in the same thread, YTC.



--
d.
.

Loading