# Bristol & Lifetime being sued



## BDBoop

Heckler files suit against Bristol Palin, TV network | Anchorage Daily News - The News Tribune



> A Los Angeles man who launched an expletive-laden tirade against Sarah Palins daughter, Bristol, has filed a lawsuit against the Lifetime Network alleging he was taped for her reality show without his knowledge or consent.
> 
> 
> In a federal lawsuit filed Wednesday, Stephen Hanks seeks general and punitive damages, saying hes a victim of defamation and invasion of privacy after video aired of the heated confrontation.
> 
> Hanks alleges he wasnt told the film crew at a West Hollywood bar in September was shooting footage for the reality show Bristol Palin: Lifes a Tripp.



I'm not surprised he's suing. I AM surprised that he wasn't in on it to begin with. I figured the situation as a setup.


----------



## koshergrl

He unleashes on her and then whines he's been defamed because somebody caught his insanity on tape?

Funny.


----------



## BDBoop

They didn't get his permission.

Very illegal, bad and wrong.


----------



## California Girl

I can't express how many fucks I do not give.


----------



## koshergrl

Bullshit. You go to a public  event that is being filmed, and scream abuse, you have no such right.

This will be funny to watch peter out.


----------



## MeBelle

BDBoop said:


> Heckler files suit against Bristol Palin, TV network | Anchorage Daily News - The News Tribune
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Los Angeles man who launched an expletive-laden tirade against Sarah Palins daughter, Bristol, has filed a lawsuit against the Lifetime Network alleging he was taped for her reality show without his knowledge or consent.
> 
> 
> In a federal lawsuit filed Wednesday, Stephen Hanks seeks general and punitive damages, saying hes a victim of defamation and invasion of privacy after video aired of the heated confrontation.
> 
> Hanks alleges he wasnt told the film crew at a West Hollywood bar in September was shooting footage for the reality show Bristol Palin: Lifes a Tripp.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not surprised he's suing. I AM surprised that he wasn't in on it to begin with. I figured the situation as a setup.
Click to expand...

That's why they call Cali the 'sue me' state. 

Would love to see the actual footage of him.


----------



## koshergrl

I suspect we'll never hear about this again.


----------



## Synthaholic

California Girl said:


> I can't express how many fucks I do not give.


But enough to bother telling us how much you don't dave.


----------



## BDBoop

koshergrl said:


> Bullshit. You go to a public  event that is being filmed, and scream abuse, you have no such right.
> 
> This will be funny to watch peter out.



I think not.


----------



## BDBoop

MeBelle60 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Heckler files suit against Bristol Palin, TV network | Anchorage Daily News - The News Tribune
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Los Angeles man who launched an expletive-laden tirade against Sarah Palins daughter, Bristol, has filed a lawsuit against the Lifetime Network alleging he was taped for her reality show without his knowledge or consent.
> 
> 
> In a federal lawsuit filed Wednesday, Stephen Hanks seeks general and punitive damages, saying hes a victim of defamation and invasion of privacy after video aired of the heated confrontation.
> 
> Hanks alleges he wasnt told the film crew at a West Hollywood bar in September was shooting footage for the reality show Bristol Palin: Lifes a Tripp.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not surprised he's suing. I AM surprised that he wasn't in on it to begin with. I figured the situation as a setup.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's why they call Cali the 'sue me' state.
> 
> Would love to see the actual footage of him.
Click to expand...


I saw the footage when the incident occurred. People figured out by Bristol's behavior that it was a setup.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq0dBm86fVs]Bristol Palin Confronts Heckler At Bar - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Synthaholic

BDBoop is correct.  Yes, I know that's redundant.


----------



## BDBoop

koshergrl said:


> It's a joke.
> 
> He goes to a television show taping, has a nutbar rant attack, and wants to claim he has to give his permission for it to be taped?
> 
> Joke.



It wasn't a television show taping. Had it been, he would have had to sign a release. Hence the lawsuit.


----------



## koshergrl

The guy is psycho. Drunken idiot attacks her when she's being filmed.

He is the biggest loser.


----------



## BDBoop

koshergrl said:


> The guy is psycho. Drunken idiot attacks her when she's being filmed.
> 
> He is the biggest loser.



Okay. Bristol and Lifetime are being sued by the biggest loser, and since he didn't give permission for the footage to air, he will likely win.


----------



## koshergrl

No he won't. 

I was filed once at Pendleton Round Up. I was in the Let 'er Buck Room under the stands, whooping it up and having a blast.

My brother saw me on the evening news. I didn't sign a release. The guy popped off when cameras were rolling. He saw the cameras, he knew he was being filmed, they were WITH BRISTOL.


----------



## Synthaholic

koshergrl said:


> No he won't.
> 
> I was filed once at Pendleton Round Up. I was in the Let 'er Buck Room under the stands, whooping it up and having a blast.
> 
> My brother saw me on the evening news. I didn't sign a release. The guy popped off when cameras were rolling. He saw the cameras, he knew he was being filmed, they were WITH BRISTOL.


Did you sue?


----------



## BDBoop

koshergrl said:


> No he won't.
> 
> I was filed once at Pendleton Round Up. I was in the Let 'er Buck Room under the stands, whooping it up and having a blast.
> 
> My brother saw me on the evening news. I didn't sign a release. The guy popped off when cameras were rolling. He saw the cameras, he knew he was being filmed, they were WITH BRISTOL.



But you didn't speak, did you.

No.


----------



## koshergrl

BDBoop said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he won't.
> 
> I was filed once at Pendleton Round Up. I was in the Let 'er Buck Room under the stands, whooping it up and having a blast.
> 
> My brother saw me on the evening news. I didn't sign a release. The guy popped off when cameras were rolling. He saw the cameras, he knew he was being filmed, they were WITH BRISTOL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you didn't speak, did you.
> 
> No.
Click to expand...



yes, I did.


----------



## koshergrl

Synthaholic said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he won't.
> 
> I was filed once at Pendleton Round Up. I was in the Let 'er Buck Room under the stands, whooping it up and having a blast.
> 
> My brother saw me on the evening news. I didn't sign a release. The guy popped off when cameras were rolling. He saw the cameras, he knew he was being filmed, they were WITH BRISTOL.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you sue?
Click to expand...



It's a public place, the cameras weren't hidden..why would I sue?


----------



## koshergrl

Of course, I wasn't embarassed by what I said. I guess that makes a difference.


----------



## BDBoop

koshergrl said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he won't.
> 
> I was filed once at Pendleton Round Up. I was in the Let 'er Buck Room under the stands, whooping it up and having a blast.
> 
> My brother saw me on the evening news. I didn't sign a release. The guy popped off when cameras were rolling. He saw the cameras, he knew he was being filmed, they were WITH BRISTOL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you didn't speak, did you.
> 
> No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes, I did.
Click to expand...



You got on mic? What did you say?


----------



## Trajan

California Girl said:


> I can't express how many fucks I do not give.



give her a break, she's in between screwdrivers or a call....


----------



## MeBelle

BDBoop said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> The guy is psycho. Drunken idiot attacks her when she's being filmed.
> 
> He is the biggest loser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay. Bristol and Lifetime are being sued by the biggest loser, and since he didn't give permission for the footage to air, he will likely win.
Click to expand...


This is 'old news' and has been around for a long time.
Is he going to sue The Young Turks and YouTube also?


----------



## Moonglow

California Girl said:


> I can't express how many fucks I do not give.



Can they buy one?


----------



## BDBoop

MeBelle60 said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> The guy is psycho. Drunken idiot attacks her when she's being filmed.
> 
> He is the biggest loser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay. Bristol and Lifetime are being sued by the biggest loser, and since he didn't give permission for the footage to air, he will likely win.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is 'old news' and has been around for a long time.
> Is he going to sue The Young Turks and YouTube also?
Click to expand...


Not that I know of. I'm sure he knew the footage was on Youtube. 

I do not know the difference, I just know that he didn't authorize them to use that footage on television.


----------



## Leweman

Idiots win stupid lawsuits in this country everyday.  Why not this guy?


----------



## BDBoop

I figure either he's right and he'll win, or he's wrong and he won't.

OR they'll settle.


----------



## Synthaholic

BDBoop said:


> MeBelle60 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay. Bristol and Lifetime are being sued by the biggest loser, and since he didn't give permission for the footage to air, he will likely win.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is 'old news' and has been around for a long time.
> Is he going to sue The Young Turks and YouTube also?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not that I know of. I'm sure he knew the footage was on Youtube.
> 
> I do not know the difference, I just know that he didn't authorize them to use that footage on television.
Click to expand...

It's only on YouTube/Young Turks because it was first on TV.


----------



## Synthaholic

Leweman said:


> Idiots win stupid lawsuits in this country everyday.  Why not this guy?


Idiots have rights.  Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to buy a gun.


----------



## BDBoop

Synthaholic said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MeBelle60 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is 'old news' and has been around for a long time.
> Is he going to sue The Young Turks and YouTube also?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not that I know of. I'm sure he knew the footage was on Youtube.
> 
> I do not know the difference, I just know that he didn't authorize them to use that footage on television.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's only on YouTube/Young Turks because it was first on TV.
Click to expand...


No. The series hasn't started airing on Lifetime yet, as I understand it.


----------



## Synthaholic

BDBoop said:


> I figure either he's right and he'll win, or he's wrong and he won't.
> 
> *OR they'll settle*.



That's the foregone conclusion.  It won't go to trial.  And if there is a settlement, it means that the judge had deemed that it had merit to go forward.


----------



## Leweman

Synthaholic said:


> Leweman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Idiots win stupid lawsuits in this country everyday.  Why not this guy?
> 
> 
> 
> Idiots have rights.  Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to buy a gun.
Click to expand...


and you wouldn't be able to talk.


----------



## Synthaholic

BDBoop said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not that I know of. I'm sure he knew the footage was on Youtube.
> 
> I do not know the difference, I just know that he didn't authorize them to use that footage on television.
> 
> 
> 
> It's only on YouTube/Young Turks because it was first on TV.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. The series hasn't started airing on Lifetime yet, as I understand it.
Click to expand...

Different series, I believe.

Oops - I was confusing with Sarah Palin's Alaska.

I apologize for the error.


----------



## BDBoop

'Life's a Tripp' offers 'no-holds-barred' look at Bristol Palin's life - The Clicker



> Bristol Palin says she is just a "grounded, normal mom", and is hoping her new reality TV show will prove it. "Life's a Tripp", which premieres on the Lifetime channel on Tuesday, June 19, is being promoted as an inside look at the life of "America's most famous teen mom" in the face of intense media scrutiny.
> 
> It follows the eldest daughter of polarizing conservative politician Sarah Palin as she embarks on her latest adventure - a move from her Wasilla, Alaska hometown to a Los Angeles mansion owned by a family friend, and back again -- along with her young son Tripp.
> 
> Palin burst onto the national scene four years ago in what she now calls "one of the most intense and embarrassing ways possible" as the accidentally pregnant, unmarried 17-year-old daughter of the 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate.
> 
> She has since parlayed her notoriety into a lucrative career as a speaker on teen pregnancy prevention, a somewhat tongue-tied stint on "Dancing With the Stars", a 2011 memoir, a controversial blog, and now her own 10-episode reality show.



SO: they've been using the footage to promote the show, and he never signed off on it.


----------



## BDBoop

And actually, he's hardly suing for anything - $75k.

'Life's A Tripp' photos: Bristol Palin and Lifetime sued - Phoenix TV | Examiner.com


----------



## Missourian

Can he be defamed by airing a tape of himself?

I don't think so.


----------



## Missourian

I can't find any law in California that restricts video recording in public...even using hidden cameras...and these cameras were conspicuous.



> Eavesdropping upon or recording a conversation, whether by telephone  or face-to-face, when a person would reasonably expect their  conversation to be confined to the parties present, carries the same  penalty as intercepting telephone or wire communications. A California  appellate court ruled that a network&#8217;s broadcast of a news report that  used excerpts from secret recordings during two patient examinations  violated the privacy rights of the physician, who had a reasonable  expectation that his communications with his patients would be private  and not recorded. Lieberman v. KCOP Television, Inc. 110 Cal. App. 4th  156 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003).
> 
> 
> But, *conversations that occur at any public gathering where one could  expect to be overheard*, including any legislative, judicial or  executive proceeding open to the public, are not covered by the statute.  For example, when a television network used a hidden camera to  videotape a conversation that took place at a business lunch meeting on a  crowded outdoor patio of a public restaurant, the conduct did not  violate the Penal Code&#8217;s prohibition against eavesdropping because it  was not a &#8220;confidential communication.&#8221; Wilkins v. NBC, Inc., 71 Cal.  App. 4th 1066 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999).
> 
> 
> California | Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press


----------



## BDBoop

Missourian said:


> Can he be defamed by airing a tape of himself?
> 
> I don't think so.



Did he know they were running because footage was being shot for her show?

Nope.


----------



## The Infidel

koshergrl said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he won't.
> 
> I was filed once at Pendleton Round Up. I was in the Let 'er Buck Room under the stands, whooping it up and having a blast.
> 
> My brother saw me on the evening news. I didn't sign a release. The guy popped off when cameras were rolling. He saw the cameras, he knew he was being filmed, they were WITH BRISTOL.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you sue?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's a public place, the cameras weren't hidden..why would I sue?
Click to expand...


Because you are not a worthless piece of shit.

I am soooooo sick of the Palin derrangement bullshit!!!!

Gawd what idiots!


----------



## Ernie S.

BDBoop said:


> They didn't get his permission.
> 
> Very illegal, bad and wrong.



A film crew is kind of hard to miss, BD. If you are being asked questions by someone holding a microphone and there's a camera pointed at you, is it not safe to think that you are being recorded?


----------



## Luissa

koshergrl said:


> He unleashes on her and then whines he's been defamed because somebody caught his insanity on tape?
> 
> Funny.



They cant use the footage without his knowledge, pretty simple.


----------



## The Infidel

They will gladly pay so they can use the footage.... it shows what idiots there are out there hating on the Palins.

FTW.... Lifetime is loving the publicity!


----------



## Luissa

Ernie S. said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't get his permission.
> 
> Very illegal, bad and wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A film crew is kind of hard to miss, BD. If you are being asked questions by someone holding a microphone and there's a camera pointed at you, is it not safe to think that you are being recorded?
Click to expand...


You have to sign a written consent, or they have to post something warning people.

When they were filming a movie here at the bus station when I was younger they had signs posted at all the entrances. When my son was used for a commercial at his school, I had to sign a consent form. Even on Cops the criminal has the right to ask for his face to be blurred.


----------



## Ernie S.

BDBoop said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit. You go to a public  event that is being filmed, and scream abuse, you have no such right.
> 
> This will be funny to watch peter out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think not.
Click to expand...


Should we expect Al Sharpton on the case? That's the ONLY reason this could get legs.


----------



## Luissa

The Infidel said:


> They will gladly pay so they can use the footage.... it shows what idiots there are out there hating on the Palins.
> 
> FTW.... Lifetime is loving the publicity!



I am one of those idiot, along with my friend who knows the Palin's well. Well I wouldn't say I hate them, can't speak for my friend. She does talk a lot of crap, but they know them personally.


----------



## The Infidel

Maybe Lifetine can blur his face and tell him to go fuck himself.


----------



## Ernie S.

Leweman said:


> Idiots win stupid lawsuits in this country everyday.  Why not this guy?



Because he didn't burn his crotch with hot coffee.


----------



## Luissa

The Infidel said:


> Maybe Lifetine can blur his face and tell him to go fuck himself.



I think it already aired.


----------



## Luissa

I think Lifetime should be sued for giving Bristol a show in the first place.


----------



## BDBoop

Would the automatic assumption be "For a TV show," Ernie?

Did he sign a release?

Then a lawsuit is the natural course of action.


----------



## The Infidel

Luissa said:


> I think Lifetime should be sued for giving Bristol a show in the first place.



*Winner winner chicken dinner*


----------



## BDBoop

The Infidel said:


> Maybe Lifetine can blur his face and tell him to go fuck himself.



Nope. He didn't sign a release. They're going to have to do some scrambling, but not of his face.

The show airs June 19th, according to the most recent link I posted.


----------



## koshergrl

BDBoop said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> But you didn't speak, did you.
> 
> No.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes, I did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You got on mic? What did you say?
Click to expand...


I guess I said "We're  having a great time!" or something banal like that. i have no recollection of it, or very vague.


----------



## koshergrl

Luissa said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> He unleashes on her and then whines he's been defamed because somebody caught his insanity on tape?
> 
> Funny.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They cant use the footage without his knowledge, pretty simple.
Click to expand...


Find the law that says that. Make sure it applies to filming in a public place, where a reasonable person would understand that they're being filmed.

He shouted across the room at the cameras. A reasonable person understands the cameras are rolling, and he continued his rant after the cameras arrived, filming him. He granted permission by continuing. It isn't like he didn't know they were there. 

Fucking progressive scumbags.


----------



## Stephanie

What a whiny assed crybaby..

I'm going to tell my mommy and sue..waaa


----------



## koshergrl

Well look at him, listen to him. Not surprising,the guy has issues. He's probably stalking Bristol.


----------



## Ernie S.

BDBoop said:


> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe Lifetine can blur his face and tell him to go fuck himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. He didn't sign a release. They're going to have to do some scrambling, but not of his face.
> 
> The show airs June 19th, according to the most recent link I posted.
Click to expand...


I've been interviewed at TEA Party rallies, motorcycle gatherings and fiestas in Little Havana in Miami. My face and words have been on TV several times and I've NEVER signed a release.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

BDBoop said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a joke.
> 
> He goes to a television show taping, has a nutbar rant attack, and wants to claim he has to give his permission for it to be taped?
> 
> Joke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't a television show taping. Had it been, he would have had to sign a release. Hence the lawsuit.
Click to expand...


And hence conservatives in this thread are ignoring the law  or exhibiting their ignorance of the law  only to come to the defense of Sarah Palins daughter. That is indeed partisan idiocy.


----------



## Missourian

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a joke.
> 
> He goes to a television show taping, has a nutbar rant attack, and wants to claim he has to give his permission for it to be taped?
> 
> Joke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't a television show taping. Had it been, he would have had to sign a release. Hence the lawsuit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And hence conservatives in this thread are ignoring the law &#8211; or exhibiting their ignorance of the law &#8211; only to come to the defense of Sarah Palin&#8217;s daughter. That is indeed partisan idiocy.
Click to expand...



Show me the law.

I've already posted that it is not illegal to video record in public,  even hidden cameras.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/tv-forum/229047-bristol-and-lifetime-being-sued-2.html#post5460232

And yet you and the liberals ignore that this is not illegal and come to defense of this idiot who shot his mouth off because he is suing Sarah Palin's daughter.  That is indeed partisan idiocy.


----------



## koshergrl

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a joke.
> 
> He goes to a television show taping, has a nutbar rant attack, and wants to claim he has to give his permission for it to be taped?
> 
> Joke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't a television show taping. Had it been, he would have had to sign a release. Hence the lawsuit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And hence conservatives in this thread are ignoring the law  or exhibiting their ignorance of the law  only to come to the defense of Sarah Palins daughter. That is indeed partisan idiocy.
Click to expand...


There was a television show taping. A camera crew was there with Bristol, filming her. In a public place. Some nutbar screams abuse across the room, knowing this. Continues to rant after the camera crew notices him, as he knew it would.

There's no law that says that idiots in public places who scream abuse at camera crews must sign a release before the film is released. The people ignoring the law in this case, as usual, are progressives. Who want to see restrictions on free press and free speech. This is a great way to assure they can attack whomever they please in public...and never be held accountable for it.


----------



## The Infidel

koshergrl said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't a television show taping. Had it been, he would have had to sign a release. Hence the lawsuit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And hence conservatives in this thread are ignoring the law &#8211; or exhibiting their ignorance of the law &#8211; only to come to the defense of Sarah Palin&#8217;s daughter. That is indeed partisan idiocy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There was a television show taping. A camera crew was there with Bristol, filming her. In a public place. Some nutbar screams abuse across the room, knowing this. Continues to rant after the camera crew notices him, as he knew it would.
> 
> There's no law that says that idiots in public places who scream abuse at camera crews must sign a release before the film is released. The people ignoring the law in this case, as usual, are progressives. Who want to see restrictions on free press and free speech. This is a great way to assure they can attack whomever they please in public...and never be held accountable for it.
Click to expand...


I just dig how the idiots are OK with a jackass hurling vulgarities at a young lady.... so which side is OK with the SO-CALLED "war on women"??

I hate hypocrites


----------



## BDBoop

koshergrl said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> yes, I did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You got on mic? What did you say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess I said "We're  having a great time!" or something banal like that. i have no recollection of it, or very vague.
Click to expand...


So you knew you were on mic, and you agreed to speak by virtue of having a microphone stuck in your face.

I'm guessing the mic had one of those little boxes that state which station or network you spoke to?

This gentleman didn't have that option, and this wasn't for the news. This was for a money-making endeavor, he looked like an ass and it was going on network tv for entertainment.

He has a case.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

The Infidel said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> And hence conservatives in this thread are ignoring the law &#8211; or exhibiting their ignorance of the law &#8211; only to come to the defense of Sarah Palin&#8217;s daughter. That is indeed partisan idiocy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There was a television show taping. A camera crew was there with Bristol, filming her. In a public place. Some nutbar screams abuse across the room, knowing this. Continues to rant after the camera crew notices him, as he knew it would.
> 
> There's no law that says that idiots in public places who scream abuse at camera crews must sign a release before the film is released. The people ignoring the law in this case, as usual, are progressives. Who want to see restrictions on free press and free speech. This is a great way to assure they can attack whomever they please in public...and never be held accountable for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I just dig how the idiots are OK with a jackass hurling vulgarities at a young lady.... so which side is OK with the SO-CALLED "war on women"??
> 
> I hate hypocrites
Click to expand...


All of which has nothing to do with the validity of the lawsuit. Releases are required when the individual is visibly recognizable, which is clearly the case with Mr. Hanks. That he might be abusive or insulting doesn&#8217;t release the program from that responsibility. Understanding the law and the requirement to obtain a release is not condoning Hanks&#8217; behavior, that&#8217;s an idiotic inference.  

If this had happened to the relative of a democratic politician, conservatives would be in full support of the lawsuit. That&#8217;s actual hypocrisy.


----------



## Missourian

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> There was a television show taping. A camera crew was there with Bristol, filming her. In a public place. Some nutbar screams abuse across the room, knowing this. Continues to rant after the camera crew notices him, as he knew it would.
> 
> There's no law that says that idiots in public places who scream abuse at camera crews must sign a release before the film is released. The people ignoring the law in this case, as usual, are progressives. Who want to see restrictions on free press and free speech. This is a great way to assure they can attack whomever they please in public...and never be held accountable for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just dig how the idiots are OK with a jackass hurling vulgarities at a young lady.... so which side is OK with the SO-CALLED "war on women"??
> 
> I hate hypocrites
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All of which has nothing to do with the validity of the lawsuit. Releases are required when the individual is visibly recognizable, which is clearly the case with Mr. Hanks. That he might be abusive or insulting doesnt release the program from that responsibility. Understanding the law and the requirement to obtain a release is not condoning Hanks behavior, thats an idiotic inference.
> 
> If this had happened to the relative of a democratic politician, conservatives would be in full support of the lawsuit. Thats actual hypocrisy.
Click to expand...



Where is the law Clayton?

The only precedent I've found clearly states a release IS NOT required, that a camera...even hidden camera...may be used to video record voice and image in any public place where the individual has no expectation of privacy...and be rebroadcast without the individuals express permission.


----------



## koshergrl

BDBoop said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> You got on mic? What did you say?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I said "We're  having a great time!" or something banal like that. i have no recollection of it, or very vague.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you knew you were on mic, and you agreed to speak by virtue of having a microphone stuck in your face.
> 
> I'm guessing the mic had one of those little boxes that state which station or network you spoke to?
> 
> This gentleman didn't have that option, and this wasn't for the news. This was for a money-making endeavor, he looked like an ass and it was going on network tv for entertainment.
> 
> He has a case.
Click to expand...


He doesn't not, nitwit. He yelled across the room, loud enough to be overheard in a BAR, deliberately to get the attention of the camera crew that he saw filming. When they advanced on him and stood next to him, he continued with his foul tirade, with camera, lights and a mic trained on him.


----------



## BDBoop

koshergrl said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I said "We're  having a great time!" or something banal like that. i have no recollection of it, or very vague.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you knew you were on mic, and you agreed to speak by virtue of having a microphone stuck in your face.
> 
> I'm guessing the mic had one of those little boxes that state which station or network you spoke to?
> 
> This gentleman didn't have that option, and this wasn't for the news. This was for a money-making endeavor, he looked like an ass and it was going on network tv for entertainment.
> 
> He has a case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He doesn't not, nitwit. He yelled across the room, loud enough to be overheard in a BAR, deliberately to get the attention of the camera crew that he saw filming. When they advanced on him and stood next to him, he continued with his foul tirade, with camera, lights and a mic trained on him.
Click to expand...


Oh, look! A double-negative. We are therefore in agreement.


----------



## koshergrl

Ikes.

I'll leave it cuz it's funny.


----------



## Luissa

He actually does, and will probably get money. Not saying he isn't an asshole.
They used him for a commercial, she mentioned him in a magazine article and called him a homosexual. 
If they would have made him sign a waver, they could have prevented being sued, but they didn't. Now lifetime will have to settle and this jerk off will be a few million dollars richer. I guess they should have done their job.


----------



## koshergrl

He called her mother a whore on camera.

I say they need to sue his ass.


----------



## Unkotare

BDBoop said:


> Heckler files suit against Bristol Palin, TV network | Anchorage Daily News - The News Tribune
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Los Angeles man who launched an expletive-laden tirade against Sarah Palins daughter, Bristol, has filed a lawsuit against the Lifetime Network alleging he was taped for her reality show without his knowledge or consent.
> 
> 
> In a federal lawsuit filed Wednesday, Stephen Hanks seeks general and punitive damages, saying hes a victim of defamation and invasion of privacy after video aired of the heated confrontation.
> 
> Hanks alleges he wasnt told the film crew at a West Hollywood bar in September was shooting footage for the reality show Bristol Palin: Lifes a Tripp.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not surprised he's suing. I AM surprised that he wasn't in on it to begin with. I figured the situation as a setup.
Click to expand...




That bald idiot should count himself lucky. He got the attention he really wanted when what  he deserved was to be dragged out behind that bar and beaten.


----------



## Luissa

koshergrl said:


> He called her mother a whore on camera.
> 
> I say they need to sue his ass.



They could have......UNtil Bristol made a big mistake. She said because of people like him she was moving back to Alaska. She had bought the house a month before the incident.


----------



## BDBoop

Luissa said:


> He actually does, and will probably get money. Not saying he isn't an asshole.
> They used him for a commercial, she mentioned him in a magazine article and called him a homosexual.
> If they would have made him sign a waver, they could have prevented being sued, but they didn't. Now lifetime will have to settle and this jerk off will be a few million dollars richer. I guess they should have done their job.



$75,000.

That's all he's asking.


----------



## Luissa

BDBoop said:


> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> He actually does, and will probably get money. Not saying he isn't an asshole.
> They used him for a commercial, she mentioned him in a magazine article and called him a homosexual.
> If they would have made him sign a waver, they could have prevented being sued, but they didn't. Now lifetime will have to settle and this jerk off will be a few million dollars richer. I guess they should have done their job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $75,000.
> 
> That's all he's asking.
Click to expand...


I bet it goes up.

I do not like Sarah Palin at all, but I do think the guy was an asshole. If someone called my mom a whore I would have done more than call him a homosexual.


----------



## Ernie S.

Had he called my mom a whore, it would be his *estate* suing me.


----------



## Katzndogz

When people film the police and are told to stop their defense is that it is a public place and they can film anything they want.

When it's a lib with his balls in the wringer it's a bit different - for them.


----------



## Luissa

Katzndogz said:


> When people film the police and are told to stop their defense is that it is a public place and they can film anything they want.
> 
> When it's a lib with his balls in the wringer it's a bit different - for them.



It's illegal to film the Police in some states.


----------



## Katzndogz

Luissa said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> When people film the police and are told to stop their defense is that it is a public place and they can film anything they want.
> 
> When it's a lib with his balls in the wringer it's a bit different - for them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's illegal to film the Police in some states.
Click to expand...


Where would that be?

Federal Courts Rule it is Not Illegal to Film Police - Technorati Technology

You can be filmed any time you are in a public place, as the explosion of surveillance cameras has proved over and over again.


----------



## gallantwarrior

koshergrl said:


> No he won't.
> 
> I was filed once at Pendleton Round Up. I was in the Let 'er Buck Room under the stands, whooping it up and having a blast.
> 
> My brother saw me on the evening news. I didn't sign a release. The guy popped off when cameras were rolling. He saw the cameras, he knew he was being filmed, they were WITH BRISTOL.



Just another asshole seeking his 15 minutes of fame while the cameras were rolling.  It just didn't get the kind of attention he thought it should.  Of course he's pissed, no one came beating on _his_ door, asking for _his _story.  He's gotta pay his dealer somehow.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

BDBoop said:


> They didn't get his permission.
> 
> Very illegal, bad and wrong.



Generally, it is perfectly legal to film anyone in public. The only requirement is that a film company pay a local fee to cover security and any disruption of business. I am willing to bet that those fees were paid, which makes the filming legal.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

BDBoop said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a joke.
> 
> He goes to a television show taping, has a nutbar rant attack, and wants to claim he has to give his permission for it to be taped?
> 
> Joke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't a television show taping. Had it been, he would have had to sign a release. Hence the lawsuit.
Click to expand...


Ever hear of fair use?


----------



## Luissa

Quantum Windbag said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't get his permission.
> 
> Very illegal, bad and wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Generally, it is perfectly legal to film anyone in public. The only requirement is that a film company pay a local fee to cover security and any disruption of business. I am willing to bet that those fees were paid, which makes the filming legal.
Click to expand...


But they have people sign waivers usually, so they don't get sued for things like this.  
Google is one's friend.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

BDBoop said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he won't.
> 
> I was filed once at Pendleton Round Up. I was in the Let 'er Buck Room under the stands, whooping it up and having a blast.
> 
> My brother saw me on the evening news. I didn't sign a release. The guy popped off when cameras were rolling. He saw the cameras, he knew he was being filmed, they were WITH BRISTOL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you didn't speak, did you.
> 
> No.
Click to expand...


I see the problem here, you think this is a union thing.

It isn't.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Synthaholic said:


> Leweman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Idiots win stupid lawsuits in this country everyday.  Why not this guy?
> 
> 
> 
> Idiots have rights.  Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to buy a gun.
Click to expand...


Idiot's rights do not include suing someone for defamation for recording you. Defamation is reporting something that is not true.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

BDBoop said:


> Missourian said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can he be defamed by airing a tape of himself?
> 
> I don't think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did he know they were running because footage was being shot for her show?
> 
> Nope.
Click to expand...


And?


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Luissa said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> He unleashes on her and then whines he's been defamed because somebody caught his insanity on tape?
> 
> Funny.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They cant use the footage without his knowledge, pretty simple.
Click to expand...


Wonderful assumption, I challenge you to find the applicable California statute to back that up.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Luissa said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't get his permission.
> 
> Very illegal, bad and wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A film crew is kind of hard to miss, BD. If you are being asked questions by someone holding a microphone and there's a camera pointed at you, is it not safe to think that you are being recorded?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have to sign a written consent, or they have to post something warning people.
> 
> When they were filming a movie here at the bus station when I was younger they had signs posted at all the entrances. When my son was used for a commercial at his school, I had to sign a consent form. Even on Cops the criminal has the right to ask for his face to be blurred.
Click to expand...


Show me the law.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Ernie S. said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe Lifetine can blur his face and tell him to go fuck himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. He didn't sign a release. They're going to have to do some scrambling, but not of his face.
> 
> The show airs June 19th, according to the most recent link I posted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've been interviewed at TEA Party rallies, motorcycle gatherings and fiestas in Little Havana in Miami. My face and words have been on TV several times and I've NEVER signed a release.
Click to expand...


A release is a courtesy designed to cover their ass when they edit the tape to make you look bad, they don't actually need one, especially in California.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a joke.
> 
> He goes to a television show taping, has a nutbar rant attack, and wants to claim he has to give his permission for it to be taped?
> 
> Joke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't a television show taping. Had it been, he would have had to sign a release. Hence the lawsuit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And hence conservatives in this thread are ignoring the law  or exhibiting their ignorance of the law  only to come to the defense of Sarah Palins daughter. That is indeed partisan idiocy.
Click to expand...


Show me the fracking law or admit you know less about the law than my cat.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> There was a television show taping. A camera crew was there with Bristol, filming her. In a public place. Some nutbar screams abuse across the room, knowing this. Continues to rant after the camera crew notices him, as he knew it would.
> 
> There's no law that says that idiots in public places who scream abuse at camera crews must sign a release before the film is released. The people ignoring the law in this case, as usual, are progressives. Who want to see restrictions on free press and free speech. This is a great way to assure they can attack whomever they please in public...and never be held accountable for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just dig how the idiots are OK with a jackass hurling vulgarities at a young lady.... so which side is OK with the SO-CALLED "war on women"??
> 
> I hate hypocrites
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All of which has nothing to do with the validity of the lawsuit. Releases are required when the individual is visibly recognizable, which is clearly the case with Mr. Hanks. That he might be abusive or insulting doesnt release the program from that responsibility. Understanding the law and the requirement to obtain a release is not condoning Hanks behavior, thats an idiotic inference.
> 
> If this had happened to the relative of a democratic politician, conservatives would be in full support of the lawsuit. Thats actual hypocrisy.
Click to expand...


Law and court citations to back your position up, or shut up.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Luissa said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> When people film the police and are told to stop their defense is that it is a public place and they can film anything they want.
> 
> When it's a lib with his balls in the wringer it's a bit different - for them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's illegal to film the Police in some states.
Click to expand...


It is perfectly legal to film the police in every single state of the United States. some police are unaware of this fact, as are some DAs, and even some state attorneys. Frack, even the federal courts have stepped in and said it is perfectly legal and constitutional to record police.

Federal Court Strikes Down Illinois Eavesdropping Law « CBS St. Louis


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Katzndogz said:


> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> When people film the police and are told to stop their defense is that it is a public place and they can film anything they want.
> 
> When it's a lib with his balls in the wringer it's a bit different - for them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's illegal to film the Police in some states.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where would that be?
> 
> Federal Courts Rule it is Not Illegal to Film Police - Technorati Technology
> 
> You can be filmed any time you are in a public place, as the explosion of surveillance cameras has proved over and over again.
Click to expand...


Some police hate the idea that they can be recorded beating the crap out of people who are not breaking the law. For some reason, progressives think police should be able to get away with it, so they think it is illegal to tape police.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Luissa said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't get his permission.
> 
> Very illegal, bad and wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Generally, it is perfectly legal to film anyone in public. The only requirement is that a film company pay a local fee to cover security and any disruption of business. I am willing to bet that those fees were paid, which makes the filming legal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But they have people sign waivers usually, so they don't get sued for things like this.
> Google is one's friend.
Click to expand...


The waivers are a fracking courtesy, not a legal requirement.

My guess is they showed him the video, asked him for a release, and he said no. Now he thinks he can sue them.

Wanna bet on it?


----------



## Luissa

Quantum Windbag said:


> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Generally, it is perfectly legal to film anyone in public. The only requirement is that a film company pay a local fee to cover security and any disruption of business. I am willing to bet that those fees were paid, which makes the filming legal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But they have people sign waivers usually, so they don't get sued for things like this.
> Google is one's friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The waivers are a fracking courtesy, not a legal requirement.
> 
> My guess is they showed him the video, asked him for a release, and he said no. Now he thinks he can sue them.
> 
> Wanna bet on it?
Click to expand...


Doesn't matter, they filmed him, he didn't sign a waiver, and now he can sue. Who is the smart one this case? Not you or Lifetime. 

Maybe they should have posted something at the place of filiming or had people sign waiver first? What do you think?


----------



## koshergrl

Well anyone can sue for anything. That doesn't mean he's justified, or that the law will support him.

I still say, public place, the guy was bellowing in order to attract attention and continued with his insane tirade after the cameras approached. A reasonable person would know they were being filmed.

I hope he accrues a shitload of attorney's fees.


----------



## BDBoop

QW, I have never seen anyone wound as tight as you are. Everything is like "ALWAYS RIGHT! LAST WORD! YOU WERE WRONG, AND NOW MUST VISIT THE FLAME ZONE TO HUMBLY PROSTRATE YOURSELF BEFORE ME!!"

Just sayin.

It gets old.


----------



## hjmick

BDBoop said:


> Heckler files suit against Bristol Palin, TV network | Anchorage Daily News - The News Tribune
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Los Angeles man who launched an expletive-laden tirade against Sarah Palins daughter, Bristol, has filed a lawsuit against the Lifetime Network alleging he was taped for her reality show without his knowledge or consent.
> 
> 
> In a federal lawsuit filed Wednesday, Stephen Hanks seeks general and punitive damages, saying hes a victim of defamation and invasion of privacy after video aired of the heated confrontation.
> 
> Hanks alleges he wasnt told the film crew at a West Hollywood bar in September was shooting footage for the reality show Bristol Palin: Lifes a Tripp.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not surprised he's suing. I AM surprised that he wasn't in on it to begin with. I figured the situation as a setup.
Click to expand...


I don't see this case going very far.

I mean come on, you didn't see the cameras? Really? The bright lights in your face weren't a tip off? The guy was an ass, got better than he gave, now he's being a pissy little bitch.

Hope he has to pay court costs...


----------



## BDBoop

koshergrl said:


> Well anyone can sue for anything. That doesn't mean he's justified, or that the law will support him.
> 
> I still say, public place, the guy was bellowing in order to attract attention and continued with his insane tirade after the cameras approached. A reasonable person would know they were being filmed.
> 
> I hope he accrues a shitload of attorney's fees.



His attorney would logically tack the fees on to be paid by the other party.


----------



## koshergrl

My point is...he's gonna lose. When you lose, you pay your own attorney fees.

And they can be exorbitant.


----------



## BDBoop

She purchased her home more than two months before she said HE was 'a major reason' she was fleeing back to Alaska.

Bristol might want to realize everybody isn't as clueless as her mother led her to believe.


----------



## BDBoop

hjmick said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Heckler files suit against Bristol Palin, TV network | Anchorage Daily News - The News Tribune
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Los Angeles man who launched an expletive-laden tirade against Sarah Palins daughter, Bristol, has filed a lawsuit against the Lifetime Network alleging he was taped for her reality show without his knowledge or consent.
> 
> 
> In a federal lawsuit filed Wednesday, Stephen Hanks seeks general and punitive damages, saying hes a victim of defamation and invasion of privacy after video aired of the heated confrontation.
> 
> Hanks alleges he wasnt told the film crew at a West Hollywood bar in September was shooting footage for the reality show Bristol Palin: Lifes a Tripp.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not surprised he's suing. I AM surprised that he wasn't in on it to begin with. I figured the situation as a setup.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see this case going very far.
> 
> I mean come on, you didn't see the cameras? Really? The bright lights in your face weren't a tip off? The guy was an ass, got better than he gave, now he's being a pissy little bitch.
> 
> Hope he has to pay court costs...
Click to expand...


He knew he was being filmed.

He DID NOT KNOW it was for her series, and they'd use the footage to promote the show. And they couldn't do that, because he didn't sign a waiver.


----------



## hjmick

BDBoop said:


> hjmick said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Heckler files suit against Bristol Palin, TV network | Anchorage Daily News - The News Tribune
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not surprised he's suing. I AM surprised that he wasn't in on it to begin with. I figured the situation as a setup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see this case going very far.
> 
> I mean come on, you didn't see the cameras? Really? The bright lights in your face weren't a tip off? The guy was an ass, got better than he gave, now he's being a pissy little bitch.
> 
> Hope he has to pay court costs...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He knew he was being filmed.
> 
> He DID NOT KNOW it was for her series, and they'd use the footage to promote the show. And they couldn't do that, because he didn't sign a waiver.
Click to expand...


That's not Bristol's fault, he should be suing Lifetime, or A&E, or whoever. Not Bristol Palin.


Damn it, I can't believe I'm defending a Palin...


----------



## The Infidel

One thing that is UNdenialbe here.... the plaintiff is an ashole 


_&#8220;a guy started yelling at me and called my mom terrible names, but couldn&#8217;t tell me one decent reason why he was filled with such hate.&#8221; _


----------



## koshergrl

The Infidel said:


> One thing that is UNdenialbe here.... the plaintiff is an ashole
> 
> 
> _a guy started yelling at me and called my mom terrible names, but couldnt tell me one decent reason why he was filled with such hate. _


 
He said it was because Sarah was born. She shouldn't have been born.

He pissed that she wasn't aborted. This is the way progressives work. They think those who have a different view than themselves don't "deserve" life.

Which is why I'm so adamant that all their attempts (and they are legion) to pull plugs/euthanize/suicide assist/abort be nipped in the bud.


----------



## BDBoop

hjmick said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hjmick said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see this case going very far.
> 
> I mean come on, you didn't see the cameras? Really? The bright lights in your face weren't a tip off? The guy was an ass, got better than he gave, now he's being a pissy little bitch.
> 
> Hope he has to pay court costs...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He knew he was being filmed.
> 
> He DID NOT KNOW it was for her series, and they'd use the footage to promote the show. And they couldn't do that, because he didn't sign a waiver.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's not Bristol's fault, he should be suing Lifetime, or A&E, or whoever. Not Bristol Palin.
> 
> 
> Damn it, I can't believe I'm defending a Palin...
Click to expand...


Bristol defamed him when she claimed he chased her back to Alaska - and she bought the house two months prior.


----------



## koshergrl

Bullshit.


----------



## BDBoop

Which part. Please be specific.


----------



## The Infidel




----------



## koshergrl

BDBoop said:


> Which part. Please be specific.


 
All of it. 

BTW, my 8 y.o. son was featured in a local paper last week, and the lead paragraph was a quote from him.

I didn't sign a waiver, I didn't even know a reporter had spoken to him, and I was present at the event.

Can I sue?


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Luissa said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> But they have people sign waivers usually, so they don't get sued for things like this.
> Google is one's friend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The waivers are a fracking courtesy, not a legal requirement.
> 
> My guess is they showed him the video, asked him for a release, and he said no. Now he thinks he can sue them.
> 
> Wanna bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesn't matter, they filmed him, he didn't sign a waiver, and now he can sue. Who is the smart one this case? Not you or Lifetime.
> 
> Maybe they should have posted something at the place of filiming or had people sign waiver first? What do you think?
Click to expand...


He could have sued even it he had signed a waiver.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

BDBoop said:


> QW, I have never seen anyone wound as tight as you are. Everything is like "ALWAYS RIGHT! LAST WORD! YOU WERE WRONG, AND NOW MUST VISIT THE FLAME ZONE TO HUMBLY PROSTRATE YOURSELF BEFORE ME!!"
> 
> Just sayin.
> 
> It gets old.



Ever read your posts?

Just saying.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

BDBoop said:


> She purchased her home more than two months before she said HE was 'a major reason' she was fleeing back to Alaska.
> 
> Bristol might want to realize everybody isn't as clueless as her mother led her to believe.



Funny, I thought you said she said "People like him."


----------



## Quantum Windbag

BDBoop said:


> hjmick said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> Heckler files suit against Bristol Palin, TV network | Anchorage Daily News - The News Tribune
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not surprised he's suing. I AM surprised that he wasn't in on it to begin with. I figured the situation as a setup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see this case going very far.
> 
> I mean come on, you didn't see the cameras? Really? The bright lights in your face weren't a tip off? The guy was an ass, got better than he gave, now he's being a pissy little bitch.
> 
> Hope he has to pay court costs...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He knew he was being filmed.
> 
> He DID NOT KNOW it was for her series, and they'd use the footage to promote the show. And they couldn't do that, because he didn't sign a waiver.
Click to expand...


Still waiting for a law from anywhere that backs that up.


----------



## koshergrl

There isn't any.


----------



## BDBoop

Quantum Windbag said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hjmick said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see this case going very far.
> 
> I mean come on, you didn't see the cameras? Really? The bright lights in your face weren't a tip off? The guy was an ass, got better than he gave, now he's being a pissy little bitch.
> 
> Hope he has to pay court costs...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He knew he was being filmed.
> 
> He DID NOT KNOW it was for her series, and they'd use the footage to promote the show. And they couldn't do that, because he didn't sign a waiver.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Still waiting for a law from anywhere that backs that up.
Click to expand...


Oh good. I love it when you just stand there with your thumb up your ass. Keeps you off the rest of the board.


----------



## koshergrl

So there is no law.

Which means no law was broken.

Which of course everybody already knows. If you're a moron screaming abuse at a young girl on camera, it just MIGHT get broadcast.

Good lesson.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

BDBoop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> 
> He knew he was being filmed.
> 
> He DID NOT KNOW it was for her series, and they'd use the footage to promote the show. And they couldn't do that, because he didn't sign a waiver.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting for a law from anywhere that backs that up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh good. I love it when you just stand there with your thumb up your ass. Keeps you off the rest of the board.
Click to expand...


In other words, you got nothin.


----------

