Myskina v. Conde Nast Publications, Inc.

386 F.Supp.2d 409 (2005)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

In July 2002, D contacted a publicity agency that represented P at the time -- to inquire whether P would be interested in being photographed in the nude for the cover and interior of GQ's 2002 'Sports' issue as part of a pictorial and profile of female tennis players. P expressed concern about being photographed in the nude. D explained that P would wear nude-colored underpants and have long hair taped to her body to cover her breasts and that, except for the Lady Godiva photographs to be published in the GQ issue, the photographs taken during the photo shoot would not be published anywhere. D presented P with D's standard release form for models appearing in Conde Nast publications. P does not recall signing or discussing a Release with D. P claims that she could not have understood the terms of the Release because at the time she was not fluent in English and 'would not have signed [the Release] had it been explained to her that [it] would or might authorize GQ and Mark Seliger to publish, sell or disseminate her photographs from [the photo shoot] beyond publication of the Lady Godiva photograph for the 2002 'Sports Issue' of GQ.' P claims that she was photographed topless in blue jeans after Seliger finished with the Lady Godiva photographs and that these had 'nothing to do with the 'Lady Godiva' concept.' She recalls that Seliger asked her whether he could take these topless photographs 'for himself' so long as they were already in the studio. She 'told him he could only take these photographs if these photographs would not be published anywhere,' to which he 'understood and agreed.' D published the Lady Godiva photos and P was not paid in connection with the publication of her photograph in GQ. The additional pictures appeared, and P instituted her lawsuit.