Interesting. If I’m reading that correctly and this is the same as the contract that was signed, Greene may have a much stronger case then I assumed. Section 22F does seem to say that a performer can withdraw their consent to do a nude scene.
When is specific performance awarded for personal services (other than non-compete clauses)? If I contract to sing at the opera, I can back out and you can sue me but a court can’t make me sing.
I still don’t think that has any bearing on the nudity clause but it does make me wonder why she was suing for sexual harassment rather than something having to do with OSHA.
And NONE of that equates to “the bitch had it coming”
People are expressing skepticism that she didn’t know about the nudity clause.
If I sign a 5 film contract to perform in pron movies and I decide to stop after the first one, can I be sued for changing my mind after the first one? I could be sued if I had agreed to sing in a bar for 5 nights and quit after the first night, I’m not sure that contracts for sex are equally enforceable.
Nudity is not sex but Bricker’s position seems to be that they are close enough that nudity might get the same sort of protection you would extend to contracts for sex.
This seems to be about the producer’s right to substitute a double, which was done in this case according to the producers.
Those two sections don’t provide a lot of information, since a nudity rider is mentioned there may be more details not in that sample.
Here is a sample nudity rider. This won’t help much because the details of the nudity and sex acts agreed upon would appear in a specific Exhibit A.
Well, no, it does, given that I said, “I posit that sexual behavior is different for a lot of folks than other things you’d contract for, and that it’s appropriate for the law to recognize that difference.”
Hey, I can answer this one! I used to pose for figure drawing classes at my college, and was well paid for it, even though I was not one of the better models. When I first started it was summer session and the ac was broken, no problem for me. Then they fixed the ac, well I mean they “fixed” the ac. I went into the studio and it was about 55 degrees. I argued with the instructor for a bit–and I did have kind of a contract, basically a consent form–and he threw in that it said I would pose draped and un draped and it made no mention of any minimum or maximum temperature. I said I would pose undraped if everybody in the studio also removed an equivalent amount of clothing-otherwise, draped. (Wrapped in a beach towel, in fact.) And only five-minute poses. It was never that cold again.
I didn’t want to read the linked articles at work, but now I have, and I understand why she didn’t call her agent. If she had, her agent would have said “you moron, didn’t you listen when everyone told you what the part was about?”
I originally thought that the statements that she’d never work again were harsh, but now I’ve read the two articles I think they are right. The number one thing on productions like this is the budget, and any actor who puts the budget at risk is toast - unless they’ve become a big star in some way. Babies get chosen for commercials not on their looks but on how well the separate from their parents. A kid who worked on a show my daughter did got fired, despite being perfect for the part, because he vanished on the set and slowed up production.
She’s nuts. As for them suing her, isn’t a countersuit standard procedure to assist in having the original suit get settled through negotiations? If they asked for the production costs right off the bat they’d be dicks, but asking for them in a countersuit sounds reasonable.
Is that a legal principal however? Is paying somebody to perform nude legally distinct from paying somebody to paint your house and are you able to accept payment for the job and then refuse to complete it?
I agree Greene would have had a much stronger argument if she had stuck with the conditions of the shoot as the issue. If she had said, “I was willing to do the nude scene that I contracted for but the production company wasn’t following established procedures like clearing the set.” I’d agree she had a good case. But her contention is she wasn’t willing to do the scene under any circumstance.
I think it can also be a means of offsetting any possible settlements. If a judge rules in Greene’s favor and awards her $50,000, the studio is hoping a different judge will rule in their favor and award them $80,000. The studio is aware they’re not likely to collect the $30,000 balance from Greene but this way they won’t have to pay her.
I am suggesting it ought to be a legal principle. The law treats sexual entertainment differently from other work in lots of ways, so there is precedent.
YoOu can always refuse to do something. Outside of the military and prisons, the government can’t MAKE you do anything. You can get sued tho. The question is whether you should be able to sue somebody over something like this.
Well, yeah, that’s why I started this thread - to address that question.
I’m guessing this case will be settled out of court.
Counterplan: The law could treat sexual/nudity entertainment differently in cases not covered by collective bargaining. The idea being that the union process works fairly well. That would produce outcomes that most participants would consider fair, though it might cause problems for a handful of individual personalities.
I’m kinda wondering that myself - she’s free to not consent to fulfill her contract, and they’re free to seek damages as a result.
Huh.
Try being me, every time someone on the radio mispronounces the name of a certain educational institution in Indiana.
I agree about it being settled out of court. Court costs, and the publicity, would be ruinous.
I wonder if she talked to the union about this? Unions in this business are fairly strong, and they probably could get her a penalty payment. Or they could refuse to help if the production company was actually following the contract and the union rules. Which is my guess.
Some of the things she claims the production didn’t do aren’t required by that AFTRA contract, it seems. For instance, there’s no requirement for “non-essential personnel” to leave the shoot, only that everyone at the shoot be part of the production. And since everyone is working on the movie, they have a need and a right to be there. There’s nothing in that contract about the shoot needing to pare down to bare minimum personnel in order to film a scene with nudity in it. Or even non-nudity.
She filed this suit 2 years ago, the producers filed their counter-complaint recently. That’s an indication that she hasn’t been willing to settle. There still may be a settlement, sometimes settlements come at the last minute right before a trial, or even after the trial begins, but I’m still having a hard time understanding how she was damaged, she was paid so it’s not that. The lack of a complaint to the union (if that is the case) reveals her motives to me, the union may fine the producers but she’s unlikely to receive any more money as a result.
She’ll never work nude in this town again.