Ripped-off by a Customer

One of the reasons why I gave up the business of photography is the calibre of the people with whom I was obligated to associate. I photographed a lot of publicity stills for rock bands and professional strippers. Granted, few of these people are low-lifes, but the ones who are make up for the majority who are not. Once, a client actually stole my negatives without paying me!

I recently came across the deposition I prepared at the time, fully intending to take them to small-claims court, but a few weeks after the incident, I decided to find another career. (Considering my fluency in weasel words 20 years ago, maybe I should have gone to law school -- not!) I scanned the typewritten document and used OCR to construct this Web page.

Warning: All of the photographs referenced from this page contain nudity or partial nudity of women, but none of the images are erotic. Most are suitible for family viewing and discussion, i.e., we're talking PG-13 here! Semi-nude means "No Naughty Bits", and Nude means you might not want Mom (or the kids) to see it -- "Viewer Discretion Is Advised."

These are posterizations made during the first session with the group; they stole the original negatives when they came for the second session. The one on the left is the one I chose for their poster, but the one on the right is one of my All Time Favorites. Photos from the second session are at the end of this page.

750112a

750112b

Day Books: January 22nd, 1975

Dennette Arthur Harrod, who resides at 35 Rundel Park in Rochester, NY,

Deposes and says;

That he is engaged in the occupation of photographing performing entertainers as his source of livelihood.

That a person identifying herself to him as Mandy Lane (35 E. Esquire Drive, Brighton, NY) did request him to photography a dance company of which she is a member, said group calling themselves DEFIANT, and that they wished to have photographs of themselves in order to promote and advertise their talents and thus find employment as a group.

That the deponent agreed to waive his standard fee in return for members of the group consenting to model for him so that he could use their photographs to promote his own talents and thus attract business to himself.

That he did photograph members of the group on or about the 12th of January 1975.

That he did design a logo for the group distinctively portraying their name, DEFIANT, with the understanding that they would use it on printed reproductions of the photograph which he had been engaged to produce for them, and again consented to waive his standard fee for this particular service.

That he did also write original advertising promotional copy describing the unique talents of the group DEFIANT, with the understanding that they would use it in conjunction with the above mentioned photograph, and again consented to waive his standard fee for this particular service.

That he did agree to contract with a local printer to have printed reproductions made of the above mentioned photograph, logo, and advertising copy, and did agree to waive his standard percentage fee for this particular service.

That he did surrender several photographic proofs of the above sitting, as well as the logo and the advertising, to Mandy Lane on or about the 15th of January 1975.

That on the 22nd of January 1975, he was requested to photograph the group again, because one of its members had been replaced.

That when they came to his studio to be photographed on the night of 22 January 1975, they asked to see the proofs of all photographs taken on the prior occasion, and he did remove said proofs and their negatives from his file, so that they might request individual prints made from those other than the ones the deponent had submitted previously for approval, and that he did not intend to charge his standard fee for a reasonable number of individual prints.

That when he asked the members of the group to sign a release granting him permission to exhibit and publish the photographs which he had taken of them, and thus fulfill the terms of the agreement by which he photographed them, they refused.

That subsequently, while he was in another room processing the photographs that he had taken of them on that evening, they did leave his studio without announcing their departure, and did take with them all of the negatives and proofs from the previous sitting.

That in so doing, the group failed to fulfill the agreement, and further seized from his possession tangible goods and service for which hew would ordinarily have charged sixty dollars.

Therefore deponent demands:

Payment of sixty dollars and the return of his negatives and proofs, and,

If the negatives are not returned, or are returned in a damaged condition such as to render them incapable of producing the same quality of print as if they had remained in his possession, that he be awarded five hundred dollars for loss of potential commissions to do a similar type of service, and

If the negatives are not returned, and subsequently photographs of the group appear on public display or in printed reproductions, other than those authorized by the deponent, that the manager of the group must demonstrate that said photographs were indeed taken by a photographer other than the deponent, or else pay a penalty of five hundred dollars for failing to identify him as the photographer.

Signed, DAHarrod 22-Jan-75

	The troupe and their manager.
Wait a second …	Lookin' good!	Even better!!
	What they could have had.

Yo ... please sign the GuestBook!

Last update: 2001-01-13 by Dennette@WiZ-WORX.com
<Who is this "Dennette" person?>

Yellow Brick Road: The path to the Mother of all Virtual Realities.

Dennette's Homeboy Page: This is where it begins …
- Dream Walk: The Electronic Journal of DAHarrod
  - Dennette's Photography Career: The parent of this child.
    - Ripped-off by a Customer: 750122.htm: YOU ARE HERE.