Do photo agencies own any pictures of Caylee or were they all sold directly to the media outlets by the Anthonys? I know in JonBenet's case, all of her pageant pictures and videos are owned by photo agencies so whenever the media wants to use a picture/video of her, they have to pay a licensing fee to the photo agency. There is no media outlet that actually owns JonBenet's pageant videos/pictures; they have to pay the fee every time they show a picture or video. However, it seems that in Caylee's case, her pictures were just sold to the media outlets directly from the Anthonys, for them to use on any of their shows. I guess the Anthonys figured they could get a better deal licensing out Caylee's photos themselves, instead of selling them to a photo agency, or perhaps they didn't think of that option.
Also, does anyone know how many pictures and videos that 200k covered?
Hope this was not already answered, but I just read this article earlier and caught this:
"
The new hour draws on old interviews with George and Cindy Anthony, Casey's parents. There are no new Caylee photos in the hour, and CBS News paid no new licensing fees for material, Zirinsky said.
In 2009, CBS News paid $20,000 to George and Cindy to license photos and video to provide visuals for the story, a standard industry practice. The material appeared on "48 Hours Mystery" and "The Early Show," and it belongs to CBS in perpetuity."
*********
in perpetuity adj. forever, as in one's right to keep the profits from the land in perpetuity. From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/In+Perpetuity
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...os-casey-anthony-cbs-20110412,0,5029059.story
Here is Richard Gabriel, his website says he is currently working with Casey Anthony's Attorneys.
http://www.decisionanalysisinc.com/...abriel&catid=39:consultant-profiles&Itemid=55
I have to add that it looks like a very fine line that the DT is walking.
According to the JAC.....
A due process provider is prohibited from paying, offering or giving anything of value to counsel including a gift, loan, reward, promise of future employment, favor, or service, as consideration or other remuneration for providing services in court-appointed or indigent for costs cases other than the services rendered on behalf of the indigent client.
Counsel and due process providers waive compensation for due process services in any form whatsoever where either indigent for costs counsel or the process provider has engaged in these aforementioned prohibited practices.
http://www.justiceadmin.org/ind_for_cost/IFC%20P&P.pdf
Now...my question is.......does a jury consultant qualify as a "due process" provider?
Regardless, JB should have covered his arse by having Richard Gabriel file a "Notice of Appearance".....but even so......did he disclose confidential priviledged info to others?
You know...as unethical as I find this "television airing" of a mock trial PRIOR to the real trial beginning.....I see it as NOTHING more than a very sad attempt by the DT to get their "story" out while they can.
What really convinced me is the "off the wall comments" by the DT regarding bananas, Febreze, dryer sheets, those killer coconuts, and deadly cheese combined with the attempts to discredit the forensic experts retained by the SAO, and now the focus of the mock trial....forensics.
KC locked herself and her team into a SODDI argument by using her Nanny story. She can't go back and shwallow (sp intended) her words.
I suspect that this mock case is a red herring.....intended to garner attention and drama right before trial. I suspect that the DT wishes to have the SAO focus on the forensics as a priority...when IMO...they intend to push the SODDI defense to the limit of reason.
Really, anything the the DT has made issue of.....should be ignored.
SNIPPED:
In 2009, CBS News paid $20,000 to George and Cindy to license photos and video to provide visuals for the story, a standard industry practice. The material appeared on "48 Hours Mystery" and "The Early Show," and it belongs to CBS in perpetuity.
In 2008, ABC News paid $200,000 to Casey Anthony to license video and photos of the toddler. Later that year, Casey Anthony was charged with the child's murder. The ABC deal ignited a furor over ethics, and the high amount stunned the TV industry.
If never before, there it is in black and white.
Hope this was not already answered, but I just read this article earlier and caught this:
"
The new hour draws on old interviews with George and Cindy Anthony, Casey's parents. There are no new Caylee photos in the hour, and CBS News paid no new licensing fees for material, Zirinsky said.
In 2009, CBS News paid $20,000 to George and Cindy to license photos and video to provide visuals for the story, a standard industry practice. The material appeared on "48 Hours Mystery" and "The Early Show," and it belongs to CBS in perpetuity."
*********
in perpetuity adj. forever, as in one's right to keep the profits from the land in perpetuity. From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/In+Perpetuity
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...os-casey-anthony-cbs-20110412,0,5029059.story
We are the consumers and we have the power. Just saying.
Take a walk. Play with your dog. Give your kids a bath. Type a blog post here but do not tune in.
Boycotting CBS until Caylee sees justice and then some. Care to join me?
I think this is a great thing. The Prosecution Team is going to eat popcorn and take notes on the BEST arguments that the DT can come up with. Meanwhile, that mock jury will NOT have heard the actual evidence which will be laid out during the trial. So the DT is going to show their hand in an act of desperation, imo.
I can tell you right now what the DT argument is going to be; the very same thing they tried to sell in the earlier 48 hours:
--There is no direct evidence tying Casey to the body, no DNA or fingerprints. And there is a stranger's DNA left on the tape.
--There are no witnesses or confessions and no cause of death determined.
--Other people had access to the car trunk and to the home and anyone else could have tried to frame her.
When an uninformed jury is given the 'facts' in this way then they would be hesitant voting for the Death Penalty. That makes sense to me too. HOWEVER, the mock jury was only privy to a 'mock' trial. They have not had the benefit of hearing Yuri, and the Prosecution team yet.
:rocker:
I agree. This makes total sense ... the DT cannot try to "pin it on" Zanny the Nanny or the Meter Reader or JG or GA or "someone else" that they can come up with ... they are all out !
I will watch the show ONLY because I want to see what the DT has "up their sleeve" ...