Don’t know why she’s talking in first personOk Jo, calm down.
Don’t know why she’s talking in first personOk Jo, calm down.
The rights would belong to the photographer not herI'm guessing Jo could probably sell it herself if she wanted through OF. Shit, I doubt it is a big deal nowadays plus she could use the money.
Do You know who took most the pics for her eBay sets….?lolThe rights would belong to the photographer not her
Btw an inch is the difference between ooohhhhhh and aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh, just saying like....so how do you know, are you in the industry ? have you met those that did the shoots with her. why so angry ? you say an inch... an inch is pretty large distance and even in those soft core teaser shots... she was def less than an inch... im saying that there was more than those pictures, the photographer did the usual soft core for those markets that took soft core ,then the tease poses, that handling erections and posed oral and such in at tease format and then the harder poses, each had a price, no one wanted those hard core shots... so were not used. but the others were. if there had been more interest then im pretty sure we would have seen the harder poses. maybe they still exist in some private collection maybe not. but they were done. thats for sure. but were all entitled to our own views on it.
do you actually know how it works.... tog does a few sets, those are bundled in strength and price, the soft sets then the middle sets, again these were done as the porn laws in the states around that time were confusing... the biggest market... on what and where mags could be sold with content... this was way before the internet took off... it doesnt happen how you think it happens... or hope that it happens... there are some of us out here that saw some of the material. and can vouch etc. anyways can say what i saw and no one believe... it really doesnt matter in the grand scheme of things does it. its in the past. everyone has moved on. even if the good lady came on and said one way or another it doesnt matter, its a pity as she was stunning in her heyday. absolute darling with a great attitude.your argument falls flat the second you wrote that noone wanted her hardcore shots. you think that with the career she had that they wouldn't have been worth a small fortune to someone, then would no doubt have gotten out into the public domain; just like with every other model who posed for similar shots? a lot of those models of the same era and just before were promised that their full frontal 'continental' shots would never be seen by the uk market, but then the internet came along and bang..... sam fox pussy, linda lusardi pussy, jayne marconi/middlemiss pussy..... so jo guest full on porn shots would also have gotten out there by now. just my theory. no capitals, no shouting, no issues with opposing views.
actually, i do know how it works, i was in the industry at the time of all this going on. but like you say, no pix means no proof either way. the end.do you actually know how it works.... tog does a few sets, those are bundled in strength and price, the soft sets then the middle sets, again these were done as the porn laws in the states around that time were confusing... the biggest market... on what and where mags could be sold with content... this was way before the internet took off... it doesnt happen how you think it happens... or hope that it happens... there are some of us out here that saw some of the material. and can vouch etc. anyways can say what i saw and no one believe... it really doesnt matter in the grand scheme of things does it. its in the past. everyone has moved on. even if the good lady came on and said one way or another it doesnt matter, its a pity as she was stunning in her heyday. absolute darling with a great attitude.
I think I like her more now than I used to aged wellOr these 5
Me to. I remember having a mag where she was in water and have good memories over those but these ones from a few years back where she is a proper milf fitty are great.I think I like her more now than I used to aged well
I thought IP law gave her her own legal rights to her image being used, no?The rights would belong to the photographer not her
assuming jo signed the usual model release forms, then the rights belong to the photographer. but if she commissioned the shots, like with the more recent ones that i believe her sister took for her, then she may own full rights to them.I thought IP law gave her her own legal rights to her image being used, no?
In the UK all rights of ownership belong to the photographer ( Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988), they may wave those rights to individuals for fair use or shared release but normally the subject of the photos has no legal rights to them.I thought IP law gave her her own legal rights to her image being used, no?
if nothing is signed.... which tended to be the case, however if the model was savvy they would get a release form signed etc. these days unless you have the full model details then you cant publish. so a release has to be in place.In the UK all rights of ownership belong to the photographer ( Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988), they may wave those rights to individuals for fair use or shared release but normally the subject of the photos has no legal rights to them.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
D | OnlyFans Harley Guest | OnlyFans | 1 | |
OnlyFans Littlecutenika / be_myy_guest | OnlyFans | 0 | ||
Celebs Go Dating Guest | Who is this girl? | 0 | ||
[Found] Guest | Who is this girl? | 1 | ||
Guest | Celebrity Nude Photos (Non-Leaks) | 2 |