That was the contract between Runner's World and the Photographer which means RW could sue the photog for illegal distribution but maybe Palin doesn't have standing?
More importantly is the contract between Palin and RW regarding the disposition of any photos they took to accompany the interview.
For some reason, Palin’s camp is strangely silent on the issue other than to accuse Newsweek of being sexist. How come they didn't concurrently announce that the photos were used in contradiction of the terms of her contract with RW?
Contracts of this nature routinely contain a clause that any photos taken in conjunction with an interview be used for that purpose only and within a restricted time frame and always, at least with a celebrity like Palin, that any further use cannot be made without expressed written consent.
So I'm very confused about this. Did Palin’s contract with RW contain the usual and obligatory clauses that allowed her some control over their later distribution?
If not, then why is she going down this “sexist” route? Did Newsweek conduct a photo shoot with Palin in order to secure pics they could use for the article and cover? If not, what photos did Palin expect them to use?
Hopefully, she’s checking with her lawyer, who will then check with Runners World. It would be great to see both the photog and NEWSWEAK sued.