I was in San Angelo for three months AIT training in 1975. It was kind of dreary, but there was one steakhouse that had the best steak I can ever remember having.
In Keller, Texas, conservative school board members brought an evangelist Dutch film crew into the high school to film a documentary. This was done without the knowledge or consent of any district official.
Another parent, who asked not to be identified, told WFAA she recently moved to Keller to protect herself and her children from dangerous family members. She said she filled out a form at the beginning of the school year in which she asked the district to maintain her child’s privacy and avoid any photos or videos.
“It’s sickening, the parent said. “It’s very concerning. Now she’s being exposed. “It’s already tough enough trying to make sure our kids are safe, and if you can’t trust the people in the school building are gonna keep your kids safe, who can?”
I expect a lawsuit.
No still pictures or video of students will be used?
So they could still play audio interviews with them with stock footage in the background?
Only if they have signed releases from the parents.
No, they could still play audio interviews without signed releases. They can also release images and video without releases.
They’re not allowed to, and in any civilized jurisdiction they’d get into big trouble for doing so, but they can.
They go back home and show the video in any fashion they please-What can parents do after the fact? Can they force the film crew to come back to the U.S. for trial. Can a U.S. judge confiscate their wages? Can they afford the team of lawyers it would take to accomplish either or both of these goals?
They don’t need to get the foreign film crew into court. They’d be going after the school district, and they’d have a strong case, especially the family that warned the school about their need for privacy. If, God forbid, that child were to be kidnapped or harmed in any way because the district allowed her to be filmed, the taxpayers of the district would end up paying for a court judgment instead of school expenses for a long time to come.
I used to be the person in charge of making sure that we had permission from the parents of any student who was photographed before that photo was published in any way.
They could also sue personally the two dipshit school board members who invited the crew in without clearing the visit first with the principal, win judgments that would break and bankrupt them.
Of course, any monetary award doesn’t do much to compensate the family trying to hide from violent pursuers.
This would be my preference, rather than suing the school district and having the taxpayers foot the bill, leaving the two dipshit school board members safe in their positions.
At the least, the two dipshits should be removed from the board, pronto.
The common practice is to sue everyone who might potentially be responsible and let the courts decide where liability lies.
If the school board members told the district one thing then did another, it’s likely that the district isn’t liable as long as what they were told was going to happen was okay, and they had no knowledge of what was going to really happen.
But either way, generally you sue everyone and see what sticks. These lawyers explain:
I proofread pretrial depositions in medical malpractice cases, and this is standard operating procedure. Any provider whose name is on the records, any group practices they’re in, any hospitals or clinics involved get thrown into the pot at first. Along the way some parties may be dismissed when it becomes glaringly obvious through discovery that no claim against them can be supported, or some escape by making nuisance-removal settlements.
It depends on what they are suing for. If they are after money then you are right they will probably find the school district the easier target. But if they if their main concern is making sure that the interviews don’t get out they might want to get a cease and desist from the Dutch company.
Can they do that? If they’re not even in the US?
(That’s not rhetorical, I honestly don’t know.)
I don’t know either, but if it was my kid I might look into it. At the very least send them a threatening letter from a lawyer so that they might think its better to remove my child from the released product rather than risk it.
Lawsuits that cross international borders are possible but extremely expensive and have all sorts of complications due to differing laws and jurisdictions.
At one point my late spouse essentially paid $50,000+ for a cease a desist order for someone in Europe attempting to steal his MIDI instrument designs and tech, so I speak from some experience. It was not fun, not cheap, and our experience may or may not have any relevance to any other legal case involving different countries or claims. A whole lot would depend on the laws of the two countries.
Hmm, so it’s possible. Thanks, that’s what I was wondering.
What country?
UK. Or, more specifically, Scotland. It involved bagpipes.