This is terrible! - Page 2

raven-blackbird · ‎06-03-2010

On 11/7/2014 NoelSeven said:
On 11/7/2014 raven-blackbird said:
On 11/7/2014 NoelSeven said:
On 11/7/2014 KathyPet said: Anyone can file a suit and claim anything they want. Whether they can prove their claim in court is another story completely.

This claim would be very easy to verify. We all know the image was used, over and over. It would be up to the company to prove they paid for its continuing use, which I suspect they did not.

not quite.............since the family is the one that filed the suit........THEY bear the burden of proving she was not paid, that she was an employee and/or she was not paid the agreed amount to use her image.........not the company.........they have the right to refute what is presented as fact/truth, but it's the families burden to prove the case..................................................raven

No, they don't. You can't prove a negative. Her image has been in use for a long time, they obviously haven't paid for that, either.

Noel..............if you file a suit, you have the burden of proof...........those companies can say not one word and win the case IF the plaintiff does not prove their case..........never mind, just read below..................................raven

http://www.cochranfirm.com/resources/PersonalInjury/burdenofproof.html

We're not in Kansas anymore ToTo

VioletEyes · ‎03-12-2010

I thought she signed away her rights. (one time payout)

Wasn't a similar thing like this brought up a few years ago. I thought I read that she didn't know what she was signing and that's why her heirs are suing.

Autumn in NY · ‎09-22-2014

I believe she was probably swindled out of her image and her recipe. It doesn't surprise me since it happened so long ago and likely the took full advantage of her.

Billions seem excessive though, which tells me that the great grand kids are greedy just like the people they are suing.

raven-blackbird · ‎06-03-2010

On 11/7/2014 Autumn in NY said:
I believe she was probably swindled out of her image and her recipe. It doesn't surprise me since it happened so long ago and likely the took full advantage of her.

Billions seem excessive though, which tells me that the great grand kids are greedy just like the people they are suing.

I think you've summed it up beautifully......................................raven

We're not in Kansas anymore ToTo

NoelSeven · ‎03-09-2010

On 11/7/2014 Autumn in NY said:
I believe she was probably swindled out of her image and her recipe. It doesn't surprise me since it happened so long ago and likely the took full advantage of her.

Billions seem excessive though, which tells me that the great grand kids are greedy just like the people they are suing.

It seems excessive to me, also. And a lot would have to do with the original contract, although celebs and the families of celebs have sued for images used after death, contract or no contract.

A Thrill Of Hope The Weary World Rejoices

betteb · ‎03-09-2010

On 11/7/2014 raven-blackbird said:
On 11/7/2014 Autumn in NY said:
I believe she was probably swindled out of her image and her recipe. It doesn't surprise me since it happened so long ago and likely the took full advantage of her.

Billions seem excessive though, which tells me that the great grand kids are greedy just like the people they are suing.

I think you've summed it up beautifully......................................raven

I agree, I'm sure they took advantage and should pay up. Billions? Almost all litigation starts out astronomical. The ask for billions and settle for much less.

It's God's job to judge the terrorists. It's our mission to arrange the meeting. U.S. Marines

nun ya · ‎03-09-2010

Nancy Green's family, she was the original, have joined in the suit, last I read.

Kachina624 · ‎03-10-2010

Another money grab attempt by people who've done nothing to earn it. I hope Quaker Oats prevails.

New Mexico☀️Land Of Enchantment

raven-blackbird · ‎06-03-2010

On 11/7/2014 kachina624 said: Another money grab attempt by people who've done nothing to earn it. I hope Quaker Oats prevails.

I tend to agree with you...........especially the ""who've done nothing to earn it""................................raven

We're not in Kansas anymore ToTo

KathyPet · ‎03-09-2010

So Anna herself never sued the company for any payment, her children and her grandchildren never sought any money from the company. now her great grandchildren say they are due payment. Seems suspicious to me that none of the family members that personally knew Anna thought they were due any payment but now these great grandsons who didn't even know her think they are due money.