Morel's publications under the AFP-Getty-Suaero byline

Imagine you’re in an earthquake. Even as the aftershocks continue, looters steal your property. Shortly after you see your stolen belongings up for sale. You’d almost certainly take steps to stop your stuff being flogged off. You’d probably tell the buyers they were handling stolen property. You might, to coin a phrase, antagonistically assert your rights.

At 4:54 pm on January 12th this year Daniel Morel did find himself in an earthquake. A Haitian photojournalist of some 25 years experience, he was working in Port-au-Prince when the biggest earthquake to hit the Caribbean for 200 years struck the city. As he began photographing the devastation Morel, a former Associated Press staffer, realised the importance of distributing his pictures as quickly as possible. What happened next, and decisions yet to be made in a Manhattan courtroom, may come to redefine how photographers and big media interact with the freewheeling world of social media.

  • At 5:20pm Morel opened a Twitter account called PhotoMorel, tweeted that he had exclusive earthquake pictures and uploaded 13 images to TwitPic, an associated, but separate, service.
  • At approximately 5:28pm one Lisandro Suaero, located in the neighbouring Dominican Republic and previously unknown as a professional photographer, hijacked the 13 images, uploaded them to his own TwitPic account, and tweeted that he too had exclusive earthquake pictures.
  • At about 9:45pm Agence France Presse copied the images from Suero’s account, and subsequently began offering them for licensing.

When he realised his work was being distributed without permission Morel engaged The Hoffman Law Firm, who began sending cease and desist letters both to AFP, their distributor Getty Images, and the two companies’ clients and subscribers.

On March 26th AFP responded, filing suit in Manhattan federal district court claiming Morel had “made demands that amount to an antagonistic assertion of rights”. AFP asked the court to rule that the agency had not infringed his copyright, accused him of making “false and disparaging statements” and asked that the court award damages and legal fees for those statements.

And on April 21st Morel’s lawyers hit back with a humdinger of a counterclaim for 10 alleged offences including multiple copyright infringement, naming as defendants not just AFP, but Getty, CBS, ABC, Turner Broadcasting and others. The preferred terms of engagement are clear. The suit is peppered with lawyer-speak for “step outside”, with AFP/Getty’s actions described as willful, wanton, false, misleading, fraud, reckless, with malice, in bad faith and with intent to deceive. To show they mean business Morel and his lawyers have registered the images with the US Copyright Office: registered images qualify for damages of up to $150,000 plus legal fees per infringement. Most intriguingly, and unusually for a copyright matter, Morel’s lawyers are demanding trial by jury.

Morel’s 66-page counterclaim – AFP’s original suit is a mere 8 pages – appears heavily researched, and is densely written and rich in detail. It covers Morel’s work history, photo agency standards and work procedures, the potential impact of social media on professional journalism, and much else besides.

It also contains a series of tweets or emails from AFP to Morel that appear to go to the heart of the case. The first, at 02.06am January 13th, is from AFP employee Ben Fathers and reads: “Hi Daniel, great work from such a difficult environment. I work for AFP, please e-mail ben.fathers@afp.com.” It’s clear from the messages – 5 in under 4 hours – that AFP know the true provenance of the pictures they are already syndicating under Suaero’s name and hope to make a deal with Morel.

In fact according to the British Journal of Photography AFP were aware of Morel’s ownership even earlier. The BJP cites 2 tweets from AFP photo editor Vincent Amalvy at 7.12pm and 9.41pm on January 12th asking “do you have pictures?” Minutes after that second tweet, having received no response from Morel, AFP uploaded his pictures from the Suaero account.

All this means that AFP had identified the true owner either just before or shortly after syndicating Morel’s images: at either point the honest – not to say sensible – course of action would have been to pull them from syndication. Yet the agency continued, despite representation from Morel, his lawyers and his agent Corbis, to syndicate the pictures until March 3rd, almost 2 months later.

That’s all pretty damning, so what could AFP’s defence be? Remember this is the company that tried to sue Google for merely linking to their pictures in search results, so they can hardly claim they believe that pictures on the internet are automatically free for anyone to use. Instead AFP have fallen back on Twitter’s Terms of Service [ToS], attempting to claim these permit third party use of any content posted on Twitter:

“When Mr. Morel posted his photographs on Twitter, he made no notation that he was in any way limiting the license granted to Twitter or third parties or that he was in any way limiting the ability of Twitter and third parties to use, distribute, or republish his photographs. Thus, a third party would reasonably assume that based on the Twitter Terms of Service and typical use, by posting his photographs on Twitter, Mr. Morel was granting the requisite license to Twitter and third parties to use, copy, publish, display and distribute those photographs.”

But that’s just plain wrong. Twitter’s ToS very clearly refer to the relationship between Twitter and its users: they have nothing to do with third parties. The only possible get-out for AFP could be that Twitter ToS permit the company to sub-license or make users’ content available “to other companies who partner with Twitter”, but none of that applies in this case.

However AFP have a further, far more serious, problem: they’re looking at the wrong ToS. Contrary to AFP’s suit, Twitter never hosted the Morel pictures; Twitter can’t host images, only text. The Morel pictures were hosted at TwitPic, which is an entirely different legal entity with different ToS. And the TwitPic ToS, unlike Twitter’s, make no provision for use by a third party of hosted content. Further, the TwitPic ToS very specifically state:

Improper Use of Data
Data mining, “scrapping”, and/or unauthorized crawling of Twitpic is prohibited unless explicit permission is given. Using any data from Twitpic (including data from images and/or users) that is not available through authorized channels is also prohibited unless explicit permission is given.

Copyright
By uploading your photos to Twitpic you give Twitpic permission to use or distribute your photos on Twitpic.com or affiliated sites

All images uploaded are copyright © their respective owners”

But if AFP and their lawyers appear to understand little of the workings of the internet, the internet was quick to show that sections of it understand little about either professional photography, or how the law works in the real world.

Techdirt offered the bizarre opinion that by helping themselves to Morel’s pictures AFP had done him a favour by boosting his reputation, and that “there are lots of ways he could cash in on that recognition”. This ignores not only that AFP offered the pictures under the wrong name, but also that just because someone advertises their work on the web it doesn’t necessarily follow that anyone can take that work for free. Techdirt’s suggestion is akin to saying that your local Apple Store would be happy for you to toss a brick through their window and walk off with a MacBook. After all they’ve displayed the goods and there’s lots of ways they could cash in on the name recognition.

Techdirt and others also suggested that Morel should be suing not AFP, but Suaero, since it was he who originally stole the pictures. But if you saw your stolen property offered for sale where would you go first? The Manhattan office advertising your goods, or the burglar whose only known contacts are a Dominican cell-phone and a Twitter account?

And a surprising number of blog comments offered what could best be described as the rape apologist defence: by placing his images on a social network Morel was “asking for it”, and as such deserves little sympathy.

The only real agreement is that the whole situation is a mess. If AFP are smart they will settle out of court with Morel on whatever terms he’s generous enough to offer. But it’s likely they’ve missed that opportunity. On March 1st Morel’s lawyers wrote to AFP demanding a record of all sales and revenues from the pictures: at that point AFP could probably have negotiated a settlement based on the proceeds of sales to that date.

Instead AFP dramatically upped the ante by filing suit against Morel, presumably gambling that he would drop the matter. But that wager has now backfired, and with Morel’s lawyers claiming multiple infringements at $150,000 a piece AFP now face the possibility of a final bill far in excess of what the pictures would have cost if licensed legally.

Bookmark and Share

67 Responses to “We Stole Your Pictures, Now We’re Going To Sue You”

  1. David White David White says:

    Good post Jeremy, thanks. Can Daniel afford this nonsense? Is there a fund I can contribute to to help in a small way? As you say, what a mess. Disgraceful, really.

  2. Al Crespo Al Crespo says:

    Excellent presentation. It appears that Daniel Morel has found himself a mean, junkyard dog to represent him, and an equally talented person to handle his media.

  3. Jeremy admin says:

    I don’t know of a fund, but I doubt he needs it. The key is the © registration, without which US lawyers generally aren’t interested in infringement cases. Morel’s lawyers have used the 90 day window to get the images registered quick enough for full protection from the moment they were shot: the court docs show they even paid the extra for expedited registration, which I don’t think was necessary, but it shows they’re getting all their AFP ducks in a row. With that paperwork in order a good lawyer can afford to take on the case on a no win-no fee basis if it looks like a solid case. Hoffman clearly feel it is and seem to be going for every available jugular.

  4. ijostl ijostl says:

    Great report. Rational and fair minded, pointing to the heart of the matter.

  5. KieranMullen KieranMullen says:

    You need to go back and capitalize Internet in your article.

  6. An excellently written article, sir!

    Re: the capitalization of internet: I was a copy editor for a while, and while it is indeed AP style to capitalize that (and email, I believe) we had a publication rule to not capitalize it, because that’s how it’s used in the real world. It’s not even a proper noun… So IMO don’t capitalize it.

  7. Mat Mat says:

    KieranMullen says: “You need to go back and capitalize Internet in your article.”

    There is no earthly reason why one would do that.

  8. jtrigsby jtrigsby says:

    EXCELLENT post! Very well researched and commented. Your analysis looks spot on to me, especially the analogies… they’re my favorite.

    This particular issue is one reason that I don’t use TwitPic very much, rather I post my public facing photos on Flickr. Their copyright policy has always seemed much more clear to me than TwitPic.

    Thanks for the great work!

    @jtrigsby

  9. jtrigsby jtrigsby says:

    Oh, sorry… one more comment…

    I’m not a huge defender of upper case or lower case for Internet, even though I typically capitalize it. Whatever floats the boat of the author…

    I would like to point out though, specifically in response to Andrew’s comment, I believe the Internet IS a proper noun as it is the name of a place. Yes, I’m aware of the “thing” argument, it just seems to me that its more of a place, where we meet and converse, than a thing that we point at and snicker.

    Still an excellent post, I didn’t even notice the lower case i’s the first time through!

    @jtrigsby

  10. Michael Langford Michael Langford says:

    Looks like someone may own a good chunk of the AFP after this is done.

  11. Clyde Smith Clyde Smith says:

    Nice work in presenting this situation.

    I hope Morel kicks those punks ass in court.

    But I’m saddened that people are wasting their time discussing capitalization. Get a grip!

  12. Dennis G Dennis G says:

    This is a great piece of reporting of the facts, and some background in the copyright questions.
    Personally, I hope the AP will have to pay up. It’s time for the AP to learn how the Internet works.

    DG

  13. Pimpin Pimpin says:

    @Dennis G:
    It’s the AFP (Agence France Press) not AP (Associated Press)..

  14. [...] full post on Hacker News If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it! Tagged with: Going • [...]

  15. adsads adsads says:

    The people whose suffering Morel photographed have no right to not have their suffering splashed across the world’s media

  16. [...] This is just appalling. AFP gets stealing images from TwitPic and then has the balls to sue the original photograher that demanded they be taken back. I hope AFP and Getty end up paying millions in damages on this one. [...]

  17. Jujurama Jujurama says:

    Great balanced reporting that explains the pertinent facts clearly. If there is any justice Morel & his lawyers will prevail. Let this be a lesson to those who would profit by exploiting the talents of others without giving proper credit or compensation and without getting their permission.

  18. Nice post, i hope Morel gets his dues. I’ve had some people try to tell me that it’s ok to use other people’s work, because that’s “freedom of speech”. Parroting phrases they don’t understand to justify anything from theft to racism seems to be common these days. It’s not ok to steal the work of others, (even if you’re not making money out of it) – you’re padding your rep with someone else’s blood, sweat, and tears. Personally, i think it’s about as low as a person (or a news service) can go.

  19. [...] We Stole Your Pictures, Now We’re Going To Sue You » The Russian Photos Blog (tags: Haiti twitter Copyright photojournalism photography) [...]

  20. Leo Daniel Leo Daniel says:

    This could have been avoided if the photographer had put a watermark across the middle of the photos and embedded copyright info in the file. Anyone who posts unidentified photos on the web is asking for trouble.

  21. Dingwah Dingwah says:

    “just because someone advertises their work on the web it doesn’t necessarily follow that anyone can take that work for free”

    Media companies have been saying the same for years, just because their content is put on the web doesn’t mean anyone can take that work for free, but no one listens, people take it for blogs, applications, etc… When media companies complain they’re told to shut up.

  22. [...] We Stole Your Pictures, Now We’re Going To Sue You » The Russian Photos Blog However AFP have a further, far more serious, problem: they’re looking at the wrong ToS. Contrary to AFP’s suit, Twitter never hosted the Morel pictures; Twitter can’t host images, only text. The Morel pictures were hosted at TwitPic, which is an entirely different legal entity with different ToS. And the TwitPic ToS, unlike Twitter’s, make no provision for use by a third party of hosted content. Further, the TwitPic ToS very specifically state: (tags: copyright law photography twitter haiti twitpic afp) [...]

  23. [...] links (2010-05-10) Published May 10, 2010 links Leave a Comment In Brief: * We Stole Your Pictures, Now We’re Going To Sue You (2010-May-03) [The Russian Photos [...]

  24. [...] The Russian Photos Blog has a really fantastic timeline of Agence-France Presse’s interactions with one Daniel Morel, a photographer whose shots of Haiti immediately post-earthquake became the de rigeur illustrations of the trauma there. For the full, nearly minute-by-minute timeline, read the original post. I’ll lay it out quickly so we can get to the discussion of Twitter as a news outlet. [...]

  25. [...] The Russian Photos Blog has a really fantastic timeline of Agence-France Presse’s interactions with one Daniel Morel, a photographer whose shots of Haiti immediately post-earthquake became the de rigeur illustrations of the trauma there. For the full, nearly minute-by-minute timeline, read the original post. I’ll lay it out quickly so we can get to the discussion of Twitter as a news outlet. [...]

  26. [...] The Russian Photos Blog has a really fantastic timeline of Agence-France Presse's interactions with one Daniel Morel, a photographer whose shots of Haiti immediately post-earthquake became the de rigeur illustrations of the trauma there. For the full, nearly minute-by-minute timeline, read the original post. I'll lay it out quickly so we can get to the discussion of Twitter as a news outlet.Morel, a photographer formerly employed by the Associated Press, was in Port-au-Prince when the earthquake hit. He uploaded 13 shots to a newly created TwitPic account, and linked to them on a new Twitter account. Within ten…Read More » [...]

  27. [...] = "This Is Twitter, There Are Rules: How AFP Stole a Photographer's Work, Then Sued Him"; The Russian Photos Blog has a really fantastic timeline of Agence-France Presse’s interactions with one Daniel Morel, [...]

  28. [...] das heutige „Urheberrecht“ den Urhebern bringt Ein schönes Beispiel ist der Fotograf, der die ersten Bilder nach dem Erdbeben in Haiti machte. Seine Bilder wurden von der Nachrichtenagentur AFP und anderen Medienkonzernen benutzt, ohne dass [...]

  29. Anoop Negi Anoop Negi says:

    I like the detailed reporting here . Compliments.!

    All my sympathy go to Mr Morel and I wish him success in his case against the flagrant misuse of copyrighted material by commercial organisations out to make a fast buck.

    It happens everywhere. I have photos that have been stolen from online site like Flickr and appear in newspapers, TV channels and such in utter contravention to copyright laws.

    It is the nature of the commercial beast to take advantage anyhow and hope that a hapless photog will not have the resources to fight a legal battle.

  30. [...] The Russian Photos Blog has a really fantastic timeline of Agence-France Presse's interactions with one Daniel Morel, a photographer whose shots of Haiti immediately post-earthquake became the de rigeur illustrations of the trauma there. For the full, nearly minute-by-minute timeline, read the original post. I'll lay it out quickly so we can get to the discussion of Twitter as a news outlet.Morel, a photographer formerly employed by the Associated Press, was in Port-au-Prince when the earthquake hit. He uploaded 13 shots to a newly created TwitPic account, and linked to them on a new Twitter account. Within 10 minutes, some jerk named Lisandro Suaero copied them, uploaded them to his own account, and claimed that he had taken the exclusive photos. About four hours later, Agence-France Presse (one of the three major western news agencies, along with AP and Reuters) snagged the photos from Suaero's account and began offering them for licensing. The photos became the shots of post-earthquake Haiti (see the top photo in this post).Morel, after realizing what had happened, sent cease-and-desist letters to AFP. A few days after, AFP responded not with an apology or settlement offer, but with a lawsuit, for "making false and disparaging statements." Morel hit back, AFP hit back further, and research done by the Russian Photos Blog shows contact between AFP and Morel that strongly suggests (that's don't-sue-me-speak for "proves") that AFP had full knowledge that the photos were Morel's, and simply did not understand that there are actual rights given to materials uploaded to services like TwitPic.Here's where we get to the more meta-journalist stuff. AFP claims that Twitter's Terms of Service allows third parties to republish any materials posted to Twitter. That's wrong, in the first place, but even more damning is that Morel didn't upload the photos to Twitter–he uploaded them to TwitPic, which is not owned by Twitter in any way, and which has its own terms of service that clearly say "all images are copyright their respective owners." AFP, like a lot of more established organizations, seems unable to change their perspectives on Twitter to address what the service actually is. That Morel posted some of the most important photos of the decade on Twitter before any other publication shows the power and flexibility of Twitter as a legitimate news service. AFP's argument, that Twitter is in some way nothing more than a digital bulletin board with no accompanying rights, is worrisome–it's a different kind of news outlet than AFP, but that doesn't mean its value in news can simply be ignored. As Jeremy Nicholl says, "the whole situation is a mess." AFP's position might not hold much water, legally. But if the AFP does manage to get away with, in essence, scraping a photographer's work and selling it simply due to the venue in which it was published, both Twitter and new media journalism have serious problems to overcome. Dan Nosowitz, the author of this post, can be followed on Twitter, corresponded with via email, and stalked in San Francisco (no link for that one–you'll have to do the legwork yourself). [...]

  31. David P David P says:

    I’d like to know if you’ve found any interest at Twitter or Twitpic to modify their respective copyright rules/TOS since this mess. It would be nice if some actual evolution occurred in the system even if outfits like AFP are determined to remain Neanderthals.

  32. David B David B says:

    Well researched. I’m surprised there’s no mention of the timestamps on the same twitpic entries between Morel and Suero’s accounts (and twitter as well). Surely, Morel’s appear first at which point it’s pretty clear who took the pictures and who copied them. After all, how would Morel have copied the pictures from Suero and beat Suero to the TwitPic punch?

    Doh.

  33. [...] news agency AFP and photographer Daniel Morel – and where Twitter fits in. In summary, AFP is currently embroiled in a rights row with Morel after using photographs of Haiti that had been uploaded on Twitpic. Morel reportedly sent [...]

  34. As a designer, writer and photographer who sells a lot of my work on-line, I have come across copyright infringement and outright theft of my work from others before. I hope Morel wins and gets tons of money from this. It’s bad enough when someone who doesn’t know any better steals, it’s downright nasty when those who do know what they are doing do the same.

  35. Nice in-depth coverage of this event.
    Pretty amazing that such high level people join right in when the opportunities have such a small time window and are so valuable.
    Sounds like Morel will prevail, hopefully all is fairly decided.

  36. waylan waylan says:

    this was a great write-up. nearly dramatic. but ultimately got right to the point. AFP really effed themselves. i suppose they really needed those images for breaking news deadlines, but.. bad way to do it. and what kind of ‘professional photographer’ or even aspiring photographer scrapes like that? what a douche.

    the moment you started on that analogy of a brick through the Apple store window, and how ppl thought Morel should have sued Suero… i thought of the Apple and Gizmodo debacle, with the editor caught in the middle.

  37. Mik P Mik P says:

    “they even paid the extra for expedited registration, which I don’t think was necessary, ”

    In the 2nd circuit (which includes the Southern District of NY) you need the registration certificate as a precondition to suit. If you file having only made the application for registration the other side can have your suit dismissed and you will have to refile.

  38. Demarthon Demarthon says:

    Courage Daniel Morel ! Une sacré mafia ces Agences Américaines ! Si, si ! Getty, Corbis et les autres … (trop nombreuses à énumérer !)Je suis moi même en procédure en France avec Corbis, donc courage !
    Avec toute ma sympathie
    Carole Demarthon

    Daniel Morel Courage! A sacred American Mafia these agencies! Yes, yes! Getty, Corbis and others … (Too many to list!) I am myself in proceedings in France with Corbis, good cheer!
    With all my sympathy
    Carole Demarthon

  39. mandingoesque mandingoesque says:

    AFP. who would have thought

  40. [...] We Stole Your Pictures, Now We’re Going To Sue You » The Russian Photos Blog – Erst die Bilder klauen und dann den Fotografen verklagen… [...]

  41. [...] La photo la plus emblématique du tremblement de terre en Haïti n’a rien rapporté à son auteur, Daniel Morel. Et pour cause. Celui-ci accuse l’AFP de l’avoir volée et vendue à travers le monde. Il a même quelques solides arguments…Explications. Image: The Russian Photos Blog [...]

  42. [...] et vendue à travers le monde. Il a même quelques solides arguments…Explications. Image : The Russian Photos Blog © Daniel [...]

  43. [...] et vendue à travers le monde. Il a même quelques solides arguments…Explications. Image : The Russian Photos Blog © daniel [...]

  44. projectmgr projectmgr says:

    Wouldn’t it just be simpler if the parties involved could sit down and reach an agreement that is responsible and fair.
    Pay the photographer, develop an ongoing relationship with the bureau, and expose and punish the fraud.
    Are the alternatives really that attractive?

  45. [...] just a few weeks ago, we discovered that AFP thinks that any photo posted on Twitter (it was actually TwitPic) is free for the taking (I don’t agree). Does that mean that giving [...]

  46. [...] That did encourage the Mail to contact her, and online picture editor Elliot Wagland wrote back, taking a page from the Agence France Presse playbook: [...]

  47. [...] Pour L’Image’s Jean-Francois Leroy concerning the copyright infringement case between Daniel Morel and Agence France Presse, Getty Images and others. Speaking to Olivier Laurent in the British Journal of Photography, Leroy [...]

  48. [...] I strongly recommend reading the full story. [...]

  49. [...] photographers we all know that the AFP/Morel situation to be completely reprehensible and that we all hope (and need for the sakes of the industry and [...]

  50. LOLface LOLface says:

    Great Post Jeremy!
    Not typically the kind of news I stop to read up on (I landed here from Stumble), but the excellent coverage kept me well interested. It isn’t often that you find a writer capable of delivering a well developed story in today’s world.

    Just wanted to say thanks for the read :D

  51. René René says:

    Yeah, great read.
    I suggest you post the conclusion to the story when it ends…

    Cheers…

  52. Kyle Kyle says:

    I am really not a news guy but this was actually a very good read and I could not take my eyes off the screen. As Rene said, I would love to read the end of this story and I will definitely start looking for your material.

  53. Vlad Vlad says:

    Interesting read, I hope Mr. Morel wins and teaches these bullies a lesson. On the other hand, this is one more reason to be very careful with so called “social networks”.

  54. Jordan Jordan says:

    Ditto with LOLface, landed here through stumble. Great read, glad it’s been brought to more peoples attention. Defiantly pulling for Mr. Morel.

  55. Knux Kitsune Knux Kitsune says:

    I guess you could say this is a case of Morel vs Immoral. It’s good to see someone man enough to stand up against the big companies. It’s not easy. It takes a lot of balls, but there must be justice somewhere in this world.

  56. [...] case, presented by Barbara Hoffman, is of course pretty straightforward: you stole my property, now you have to pony up. The main opposition party, Agence France Presse, is represented by Joshua Kaufman, and their [...]

  57. Interesting article. I like your blog so i will come back again. Keep up the good work.

  58. [...] photographer Daniel Morel has received a welcome Christmas present in his ongoing case against Agence France Presse and others. On December 23 New York District Judge William H Pauley quashed an application by AFP [...]

  59. [...] and social media to distribute those images. The most notorious example of what can go wrong is the Agence France Presse heist of Daniel Morel’s award winning images of last year’s Haiti earthquake. Color’s terms [...]

  60. [...] social media to distribute those images. The most notorious example of what can go wrong is the Agence France Presse heist of Daniel Morel’s award winning images of last year’s Haiti earthquake. Color’s terms [...]

  61. [...] basic facts of the dispute have been well documented and the memoranda, running to hundreds of pages, broadly confirm the [...]

  62. [...] AFP, how’s that “steal the photos & sue the photographer” business plan working out [...]

  63. [...] AFP, how’s that “steal the photos & sue the photographer” business plan working out then? Three years almost to the day since photo agency AFP heisted [...]

  64. [...] AFP and Getty have committed in the Morel case, none can compare with the decision to declare legal war on Morel for defending his own copyright. Apparently nobody at AFP has heard of the Streisand Effect, in [...]

  65. [...] We Stole Your Pictures, Now We’re Going To Sue You Agence France Presse unveil an avant-garde new business model: steal news photos, then sue the photographer when he objects. [...]

  66. [...] $10m. And where will the bulk of that not-so-small fortune be headed? Why, to the same lawyers who advised AFP to sue Morel, then led AFP and Getty to a uniquely humiliating courtroom defeat, and are now representing them [...]

Leave a reply: usual Marquess of Queensberry rules apply.

(required)

(required: will not be published)

What I’m thinking…

    Translate this Page