Robin Hoffman: Perspective Lends a Helping Hand
Dem Rep: 'However Inarticulate, I Think Miss Utah Was On To Something'
Sara Bostwick had no qualms with vowing to accept her husband for better or worse. Her wedding photos were a different story. The New York newlywed recently lodged a lawsuit against a photographer whom she claims took revealing pictures of her on her wedding day, then posted them online. Bostwick says she suffered post-traumatic stress disorder from the exposure, detected when her husband spotted the shots on the studio Web site two months after their wedding.
The photographer being sued is Carolyn Monastra, who works for Christian Oth Inc., rated one of the top 10 wedding studios in the world by American Photo magazine. (The studio also appeared in the movie "Bride Wars.") Bostwick alleges Monastra took photos of her in her underwear even after she told her to stop.
You could argue that if Bostwick had really wanted Monastra to lower her lens, she would have had her removed from her dressing room. But any bride will tell you that a wedding day is chaotic, and Bostwick was probably distracted. Still, no matter what Bostwick told Monastra, the written documents may matter more in court.
Dennis DiPasquale, a New Jersey wedding photographer, says it's a dicey situation. While he agrees Monastra should have stopped snapping when Bostwick told her to, the use of the photos on the studio Web site present a different problem.
"There is usually something in the contract between the photographer and the client stating information about using pictures for promotional purposes, either on the Web site or in ads," he said. If you don't want that, "you look on the contract and scratch out the part where you can do that. Put a line in it. Initial it ... It gets kind of tricky if it's not on there. Is it implied? That's something more for a lawyer than a photographer to decide."
Update: A spokeswoman from Christian Oth got in touch last night with this statement about the lawsuit:
"We are surprised and disappointed to learn that Mrs. Bostwick has filed a lawsuit against us in which she claims that we intentionally violated her privacy. We have never posted any images of Mrs. Bostwick on our public website or in any other public venue. Client images, such as Mrs. Bostwick's, are posted on our proofing website and are always password protected... We believe that the substance of the allegations contained in Mrs. Bostwick's complaint are completely without merit, we emphatically deny those allegations, and we look forward to having this case dismissed."
Meg U., who got married in Philadelphia in July, not only did not let her photographer take pictures of her getting dressed, she also bought the copyrights to the images so they could not be used on the studio's Web site.
"The photographer has the copyrights unless you buy them from him, in which case he can do what he wants with them," she said.
Brooke R., who is getting married in New Jersey next year, says it's Bostwick's fault "if she allowed it and signed a waiver to advertise with the session photos.
"If the photographer excluded that in the contract, it's against the law to publish, and I wouldn't be happy either. I think personally, I would only allow the picture-taking once the dress is covering me -- maybe Mom zipping me up, but nothing more revealing than that!"
As for Bostwick's claim that the photos caused PSTD, Wexford, Penn., psychologist Dr. Elizabeth Lombardo, PhD, MS, PT, says that's probably not accurate.
"PTSD is a highly specific diagnosis that entails being exposed to a life-threatening or at least seriously physically threatening event ... More likely than not, this event caused shock, embarrassment and anger, all of which makes sense, but do not fall under the category of PTSD."
Tell us: Is it the bride's fault for letting in or not removing Monastra from the dressing room, or is it the photographer's for not stopping when told?
More Good Stuff on the Web:
Five Things You Never Knew about Children's Author Roald Dahl (Ask Men)
The top 10 things girls don't want to know about their boyfriend's ex. (Ask Men)
Did you know Jimi Hendrix supposidly had a sex tape? That and more facts in this history of sex tapes... (Maxim)
The Godfather's fatal flaw (and 8 other character's who aren't as invulnerable as we thought). (Guyism)
Whether it's an emo swoop, a frat-boy spike or a the Mr. Clean, find out what his haircut says about him here. (Holy Taco)
Mickey wasn't Disney's first choice for mascot...find out who was. (Mental Floss)
Comments:
Add a comment
Wednesday 18 November
By Lorraine
I don't know if this idiot was in a chaplel or what, but this nut job was getting MARRIED!!!!!!! Everyone has the right to dresss whitchever they choose. But she looks like a WHORE!!! So do her bridesmaids. PTSD my ASS! if I was that photo guy I would have posted them too!
Reply
Tuesday 24 November
By cara
the picture up there is NOT a picture from the wedding duh... its just an image that was uploaded for this article, its a picture form a bridal runway show, the pictures that were taken of the bride that exposed her were in her dressing room before and while getting the dress on and the photographer was asked to not take picture of her while dressing and the photographer ignored the request and still took pictures that showed her in her underwear so quit flipping out about some stupid random picture... thats why underneath it says GETTY IMAGES... its not a pic of the bride
Tuesday 29 December
By Lauren
I don't know if you realize but I don't believe the photo in the article is the lady who is filing the claim. I believe this picture is an example picture of what the photographer took, not the actual photo or person. If you look closely you will see the "bride" and "bridesmaids" are on a runway, and there are people to the side snapping photos and some clapping, looks more like a fashion show than the actual bride mentioned in the article.
Wednesday 18 November
By misty
If it's from this picture they are showing, are all the girls that are in the photo standing in what looks to me as longerie? Why then would the bride have the photographer here. I think there was a bit more going on here than what we are seeing in this article. And of course it's just one more bogus way to sue someone to get some money. This doesn't sound on the up and up to me.
Reply
Wednesday 18 November
By anon
The image appears to be from a bridal lingerie fashion show. Look at the multiple viewers, the "runway" setup - the photography described in the article occurred in the dressing room prior to an actual wedding.
Wednesday 18 November
By kira
I agree. This is ridiculous. Don't blame the photographer, and obviously she KNEW he/she was there... Look at the picture the photographer would have been like RIGHT in front of her. She clearly could have seen the person! If it was THAT big of an issue she should have asked him to put the camera away while she was dressing like a skank. Did she? From the look on her face in that picture I don't think so. What is she soo embarrassed by anyway? You stripped down in front of your family and friends... your FATHER saw you in that everyone saw you in it... whats the problem with strangers who don't even know you seeing you in it if you had no problem doing it at your wedding?
Wednesday 18 November
By NuNu
No, that can't be one of the pictures...it looks like some kind of runway or something.
Wednesday 18 November
By Willie Meihls
Yeah, that looks BOGUS to me....those are models on a runway modeling what looks to be wedding night lingerie.....it's not someones wedding at all.....
Friday 20 November
By Jill
The photo shown is a stock image from Getty Images. Getty is not involved in this story. It looks to me like a photo of a runway show.
Wednesday 18 November
By Chillie Willie
I feel that the lawsuit doesn't go far enough! When you consider that the Bride said "STOP!", then the photos (especially the 'forbidden photos') were intentionally 'published' WITHOUT the Brides' consent.
Reply
Wednesday 18 November
By bill
Well now they're all OVER the Internet. Oooops
Reply
Wednesday 18 November
By watdafuk
No big deal she`ll just have to file a few more law suit`s,No problem plenty of scumbag lawyers out there willin to help her out,for a cut.
Wednesday 18 November
By Diane
It's like the Bride said, Arranging for a wedding is a chaotic time, often then there is so much going on some things are missed. People trust the professionals they hire. That' why they are called professional. When a paying client says stop, you stop! And since it is a chaotic time it is on the professional to inform the client. That is another part of being professional. In the presentation of the contract certain things should be noted, the fact that the pictures could end up in the web page or in advertising is one of those important points. I think the photographer took advantage of the chaos, and that is not professional.
Reply
Wednesday 18 November
By how's it?
hey STUPID, PTSD don't work like that. you don't get PTSD from seeing yourself acting like a fool....nice try though....PTSD is for people that either see something like soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan, police officers, EMS workers firefighters see...NOT yourself acting like a fool, then trying to sue the photographer for taking racy photos of you when you don't want your friends seeing you acting like a fool...deal with it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
Wednesday 18 November
By Jenniferh021
Is this woman kidding me???? PTSD??? I don't think so, sweetheart. If you choose to have a photographer present and then choose to undress or do whatever it is she is doing in that photo, and your picture gets taken?? TOUGH. That is what you hired him for and if you did NOT want the photos taken you would have REMOVED the photographer from the venue during your little striptease!! What a joke. I hope she does not actually get a judge that falls for her crap and I wish the photographer luck, all he did was his JOB.
Reply
Wednesday 18 November
By leah
Agreed. Couldn't say it better myself.
Wednesday 18 November
By Chelsea
I agree, the photographer should have stopped taking pictures when the bride told her to. Further, I think the photographer shouldn't have been allowed in the room until everyone was decent, and then maybe a few staged shots of lacing up the dress and putting on the veil, garter, shoes, jewelry, etc. But my biggest issue is with the studio and them posting pictures of the bride in that state. If they had the right to do so per their contract, fine, but they should have had the common decency not to post pictures of the bride half-naked. That's just plain ignorant.
Reply
Wednesday 18 November
By Rick
Quote from the photo studio:
"We are surprised and disappointed to learn that Mrs. Bostwick has filed a lawsuit against us in which she claims that we intentionally violated her privacy. We have never posted any images of Mrs. Bostwick on our public website or any other public venue. Client images, such as Mrs. Bostwick's, are posted on our proofing website and are always password protected. Our clients' privacy is a foremost priority. Therefore, the log-in and password to our proofing website are provided only to the client. Sharing of the log-in and password for this site is done at the sole discretion of the client. We believe that the substance of the allegations contained in Mrs. Bostwick's complaint are completely without merit, we emphatically deny those allegations, and we look forward to having this case dismissed."
You can read the press release in its entirety on Oth's Web site.
One of her "friends" Let the photos loose on the internet. LOL
Wednesday 18 November
By kissbr
Legally, this photographer may or may not have been within her rights. I'll leave that to the courts to decide. Morally, I think the situation is much more clear. The bride said "Stop", and that should have been sufficient. Professionally, this photographer is way out of bounds! She was hired to preserve memories of the most important day in this bride's life, not expose her to shame and possible ridicule! If she took these "racy" photographs before the bride told her not to, then she should have separated those prints from the rest, and either destroyed them or given them to her principal, the bride, and let her decide what should be done with them.
And "Jenniferh021", the photographer was NOT doing HER job!! Note the "HER", not "his"!!
Reply
Wednesday 18 November
By buzhadi561
Life is so lonely .I am a rich man and single at present .I need a woman who can love me back .I also uploaded my hot photos on MillionaireRomances.Cooooom under the name of jeff1098..It's the largest and best club for seeking CEOs, pro athletes, doctors, lawyers, investors, entrepreneurs, beauty queens, fitness models, and Hollywood celebrities.Please Check it out!I'm serious.
Reply