Real offer? or Rick S. just blowing smoke? Where is Rick S.
- Thread starter CocoboloCowboy
- Start date
Did the policemen who responded to the accident get paid? Did the coroner get paid? The ambulance driver? The EMTs? The city workers who cleaned up? The lawyers who were asking for the photos? The people who worked for the organization that are demanding the photos for evidence?
Everybody got paid but the photographer. And somehow, even though his job is important enough that everyone wants the photos and everything hinges on them, the photographer is an asshole for asking to be paid...like everyone else.
I guess I don't see the logic.
Well....do you really think that the lawyers-family would have had a problem paying a reasonable price for the photos? Hell no.....
Don't create any more stress-strain on the poor lady who just lost the father of her children-husband by holding the photos as ransom for more money. Do you really think that's right?
They had to go court over this....
No ... that would be Clarence Thomas (aka) "Long Dong Silver".
Sorry Bruce, I just couldn't help myself !
Last edited:
No, you don't see the logic. That's too bad.
lol! really? Too funny.
Hey Coo Coo....
The offer was made 3-4 years ago. Don't act like you don't remember it. You want to find it, go back and look for the post. It's there.....
It's right before the posts where I talk about you taking photos of the man who was killed in the traffic accident laying in the road. Remember that ?? Where you wouldn't give the poor DEAD man's wife the photos she needed for the insurance company.....without a $$$ payment? Over there in California...remember? I can send a link to the newspaper article to refresh your memory if you need me too?
You're memory is slipping bad....better get a Alzheimer test quick. Pssst....have them chk for a heart too
ChicagoRJ, an explanation of your logic is necessary.
I'm not seeing the problem. Man wants to get paid for services rendered.
So, you would have no problem if the ambulance showed up, but suddenly said, OK, that will be $4K, 5 times more then they normally charged, and if they blinked, you just drive off.
They don't meet your price, F'em all, right ?
Value is entirely relative to a given situation.
So, then no problem with the ambulance driver taking off, correct?
as long as no law is broken, no issue here.
Playing his game
We have no issues ....................................................................
I just don't think your reaction is going to do you any good, Do YOU.
We have no issues ....................................................................
I just don't think your reaction is going to do you any good, Do YOU.
First of all, not analogous. The ambulance shows up and bills later. The patient usually has no clue what the ride will cost. AND the ambulance drivers and the ambulance companies are getting paid. They are driving a company vehicle and using company equipment while on company time.
The freelance photographer on the other hand, drove there in his own car, bought his own gas, used his own time waiting for something to happen or finding something to photograph, used his own camera and film and does not get paid for anything unless someone buys the photos. And he was obviously freelancing at the time because if he wasn't the company he was working for would have negotiated the sale of the photos because they would have had the rights to them.
IMO a better analogy is: Would you expect the ambulance drivers to invest in their own ambulance, buy their own gas, buy their own medical equipment, buy their own uniforms, wait on their own time unpaid for an emergency call, and then drive to the scene and save someone's life and take them to the hospital without getting paid or even reimbursed for their expenses? Obviously not. Yet that is what people expect the photographer to do.
I agree that on first blush it looks like the photographer is a greedy sob. And the media certainly portrayed this story that way. I remember this story when it came out (although I had no idea it was our very own coco that was involved in it.) I even remember thinking that the photographer was a greedy sob at the time. I was as naive as everyone else about the photography business back then.
I'm not trying to convince you and I don't think I can. I'm just presenting an alternate way of framing the situation that probably didn't occur to most people when they heard or read about that story.
As for Rick's point about a fair price - Obviously opinions varied about what a fair price was and that's why they went to court. And that is the precise role of courts in civil disagreements.
This stuff is crazy. It reminds me of this girl who told me that were like macaroni and cheese, that we just go together. I thought it was pretty cheesy to say the least. 
i've read all 4 threads
2008 - declined
2011 - declined
2014 - no offer was on the table
And that's why we have internet forums, so we can call out DB moves like that. You dont' have to like it, but I'm pretty sure we know where the majority sides on this issue.... so you and coco must feel good about pulling that move on a grieving widow,..... nothing says integrity like a pool player....bravo.
Last edited:
I wouldn't pull that move on a grieving widow. And I never have. Stop trying to make everything personal it gets annoying.