Suicide Girls would be Suicide
Oct. 9th, 2007 11:31 amThe Jesus-Fuck-I-Wouldn't-Touch-That-With-A-3.048m-Pole clause, similar to what has Lithiumpicnic in trouble from his contract, is the non-competition clause.
8. Non-Competition. Photographer agrees that for two (2) years after the full execution of this Assignment, Photographer will not directly or indirectly: (i) sell or otherwise provide Internet, photographic, video, film, audio, text, design, artistic or other creative content to any “SG Competitor”; or (ii) own, manage, operate, join, control, finance or participate in the ownership, management, operation, control or financing of, or be connected as an officer, director, employee, partner, member, principal, agent, representative, consultant or otherwise, to any “SG Competitor”. “SG Competitor” means any person, entity or organization other than SG that competes with SG, including but not limited to any person, entity or organization that creates, develops, manufactures, produces, distributes, markets, licenses or sells events, products or services that compete with SG.Should, for example, at some point in the next two years Gothic BC or any of my other sites be deemed an "SG Competitor" I'd be screwed. If I shot for any other site I'd be screwed. If I so much as provided my professional services as a photographer, artist, programmer or consultant (how I make my living!) to any entity that happens produce any kind of material that competes with SG, even if my work is not directly related to the competing products, I'd be liable.
And for what? SG pays $500 USD (now worth only $471.97 CAD) per set. Split with the model I'd have about $235 taxable dollars in my pocket. In return they have me by the short-hairs for two years. How not worth it is that?
With this non-competition clause, no sane professional photographer would have anything to do with SG.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 06:36 pm (UTC)The other reason is that I really can't afford to lose my decent job/reputation because someone's decided I'm a Pornographer. Girls always ask me to shoot them because I'm "not skeezy", but if I'm taking pictures of naked people for a porn site that regulates and underpays its models/photos, aren't I by proxy then being skeezy?!
Thanks for posting this--it's much appreciated to see someone else with my same mindset.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 07:11 pm (UTC)In other news, wait until you see some the steampunky-goodness I have up my sleeve for Elaine's store... ;-)
no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 07:32 pm (UTC)Not to mention...but frankly I am like, SO bored with fetish photography and pin-up girls. I mean, really. It can be so exploitative...and so banal. Show me something I haven't seen before. Mmmhmm.
Can't wait to see the store! I do so love Elaine's work.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 08:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-10 06:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 07:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 07:35 pm (UTC)What a load of rich creamery butter.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 08:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 09:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 10:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-09 11:38 pm (UTC)As the US gets more dependent on foreign oil they need to print more money, which devalues the currency, but that is not the worst of it. There are now countries that are taking Euros for oil and countries are now maintaining reserves in USD and EUR.
Take these three countries for example:
Venezuela: Accepts Euros and value-for-value exchange for their oil. Oil production is state-owned and oil products are sold domestically at cost. Cheney said publicly that Chavez needs to be shot. The US tried to orchestrate a coup and install a puppet dictator (and failed).
Iraq: Former puppet government started taking Euros for oil. Invade. Depose. Install new puppet government.
Iran: Started taking Euros for oil. Invasion is imminent.
All scary enough. Scarier still is Russia now taking Euros for oil, China continuing to refusing to buy into US-centric economy at all, and Saudi Arabia (kingpin of OPEC) making moves that point to unbinding itself from the US dollar.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-10 04:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-10 07:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-10 02:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-10 12:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-10 12:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-10 04:43 am (UTC)I just read your post to my BF and he comments "... which is precisely why their photoshoots often look as unprofessional as they do."
indeed.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-10 09:06 am (UTC)from what I remember - non-competition clauses are illegal/not enforceable in Canada as no one is legally allowed to prevent you from earning a living - it is a guaranteed right under the charter of rights and freedoms.
I remeber when a company I was working for (for free at the time) tried to casually pass off a NCA under my nose. For no compensation at all I wouldnt be allowed to work in the computer industy until my knoweledge was outdated (effectively ending my career).
no subject
Date: 2007-10-11 07:26 pm (UTC)& never mind all the legalese. The alarm bells really went off when I saw the money. $500? $500!? Listen UP Scrooge, I start at $5500, & that doesn't include stuff like expenses, time, or showing up dressed. Crystal?
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 07:28 pm (UTC)Yikes.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 10:13 pm (UTC)