GNR Sued

[pilferk]

That's the one thing I couldn't understand about it  The photos are one issue. The, alleged, sexual harassment is something else. Surely they are two individual issues. The photos would be about written contracts, and that's it.

And they're a big issue.

I think there's some problems with her allegations.  I'm no lawyer, but I'm familiar with contract law and, specifically, how contracts/contract law works with independent contractor work and how those contracts can be extended in a defacto manner.

Her showing up to the arena, and being granted special access to the band, is going to be viewed by most arbitrators/judges as a defacto acceptance of an extension of her original contract terms.  In abscence of a contemporaneous written objection, her acceptance of access (and potentially payment), and certainly any travel and accomodation arrangments, are probably enough here to show that she perceived herself to be under contract, still.  If she bought her own ticket(s), and was taking pictures....it's a different story.

In addition, she mentions that she was in a workplace that had no sexual harrassment policy/training/etc. and no HR department.

As an independent contractor, she's not really entitled to ANY of that support or documentation.  Companies CAN provide it, for long term independent contractors (aka WWE does this for their wrestlers), but they are not required to.  The fact they don't provide that material/support can't be used against GnR. Lots and lots of independent contractors, in lots and lots of industries, aren't provided that kind of support and don't have HR department access for the company contracting them.

[cineater]

I'm not a lawyer either but 'I didn't find out I was getting screwed until I started working for other bands' doesn't sound like it's going to fly.  Should have got legal advice before you sign a contract.  I wouldn't have started turning over my work without a contract in place and I sure as hell wouldn't have continued to sign contracts/work for them if what Fernado was doing was creeping me out.  Poor little me my first language isn't English and I trusted him just sounds like an excuse when she should have had lawyers and accountants looking after her business.  Failure to know what the fuck you are doing doesn't mean you get a redo when you fuck up.  Kind of sad she had to learn some of this the hard way.

[DeN]

the only question is why would someone lies about this?

she didn't even pressed charges against Fernando about it as someone pointed out, so there's no money to gain from this, so why lying?
it doesn't make any sense.


PS : and for what I understand Katarina actually sued first but it was dismissed because of some legal mistake, THEN the band sued back, so that argument doesn't work either

[ItsoEezee]

I haven't finished reading her filing, but... even though she continued to work without a written contract for long periods, she could argue that the sexual harassment induced her to accept the terms without changes for fear of losing the work.  Spitballing here.

[pilferk]

the only question is why would someone lies about this?

she didn't even pressed charges against Fernando about it as someone pointed out, so there's no money to gain from this, so why lying?
it doesn't make any sense.


PS : and for what I understand Katarina actually sued first but it was dismissed because of some legal mistake, THEN the band sued back, so that argument doesn't work either

Again, just as devil's advocate:

To elicit a settlement.  Because there is a dispute over the contract law, and this is a way to gain an uppper hand (perceived or otherwise) in settlement talks.  Becauase, as many have acknowleded in this discussion, it looks bad.

People lie for a LOT of reasons, money being a primary one.  

I'm not saying she's lying. I'm just offering you an example of why she might, because you asked.

This is why we have independent arbitrators and courts.  To figure out who is telling the truth, based on a ponderance of the evidence.  A lot of what she alleges, she also alleges to have documentation/proof of.  Context of that documentation is going to be important for her case.  

There is a not all that cynical, and completely reasonable, interpretation of these filings that we're seeing a contract dispute and both sides are throwing up as much perjorative "stuff" as they can to make the other side look bad.  That's, unfortunately, not an usual tactic in contract disputes where parties want to induce a settlement, rather than a prolonged litigation.

And again, we're not 100% sure on timelines (and that legal mistake could be telling).  We know GnR objected to her copyright filings, likely at least 90 days prior to their suit being filed.  And she would have been aware of those objections.  The timing is suspect given she's been away from the band since 2022, and most of the allegations were happening 7 years or so ago.  

"Why would she lie?" isn't a bad question.  But it should be accompanied by "Why would she wait so long to come forward", too.  Because both are relevant here. Again, maybe she just decided to let it go, until the legal wrangling started.  Or maybe not.  But the timing of the allegations with the various legal filings is beyond a point where we're talking about coincidence.  

We don't know the answers to any of these questions, yet.  We might not ever.

[ITARocker]

the only question is why would someone lies about this?

she didn't even pressed charges against Fernando about it as someone pointed out, so there's no money to gain from this, so why lying?
it doesn't make any sense.

Man that's exactly the point. It does make sense because she uses everything she can - maybe even something she can't really prove (but we don't know) - to kinda force gnr to settle and pay her, because in this peculiar historical period whatever you say becomes magically true, words count more than facts ( i remind we had an argument on words/facts some years ago talking about racism) so, in order to avoid the big shit show you just pay.

And it's not necessarily a full lie. Imagine you have this friend of yours, maybe a co worker, u both always make  jokes about sex etc etc and have fun about it. Someday u  send her some explicit content maybe recalling what she said that day and she answer you with some smiling emoticon. Ok? After a couple of years she's mad at you for whatever other reason, she wants revenge, and she shows that message to people, telling it was harrasment. People who have to judge her claims don't know the context so it's really easy for her to push you into a corner. You're fucked.

[pilferk]

I haven't finished reading her filing, but... even though she continued to work without a written contract for long periods, she could argue that the sexual harassment induced her to accept the terms without changes for fear of losing the work.  Spitballing here.

As an employee? Yes.

As an independent contractor? Hard to make that case because there's no power dynamic.  The contract is a mutually agreed upon thing, even if in a defacto manner (and maybe especially then, because there's literally no consequence for "breaking" the extended contract since the defacto extension isn't specifically defined...you can literally just say "bye, I'm done" and walk away at any time. Just stop accessing the benefits and compensation).  And if she walks away, at any time, nothing precludes her from finding work in other places. As an independent contractor, nothing guarentees you work from a specific entity, even if you had a past contract with them.  The fact she left in 2022 and, indeed, did find other work, perpetuates that assumption.

[pilferk]

And it's not necessarily a full lie. Imagine you have this friend of yours, maybe a co worker, u both always make  jokes about sex etc etc and have fun about it. Someday u  send her some explicit content maybe recalling what she said that day and she answer you with some smiling emoticon. Ok? After a couple of years she's mad at you for whatever other reason, she wants revenge, and she shows that message to people, telling it was harrasment. People who have to judge her claims don't know the context so it's really easy for her to push you into a corner. You're fucked.

I think that's largely my point here, and you make it very well.

We lack the context necessary to pass any judgement: true or false, guilty or innocent.

Automatically assuming she's telling the truth or assuming she's lying is unfair.  She deserves to be heard.  And she deserves her day in court.

If someone(s) is/deemed to have done something wrong, they should be held accountable.

Everyone deserves to have their say.

We have one person's side of the story, and that's it.  Without context or full information.

[DeN]

using everything you can as leverage to win a legal action is justified, bringing the sexual harrasment
to generate press articles too, it doesn't mean you're lying. again, there's no reason why she would
lie about these things, as the large majority of women.

about something else, but given the context I can't help but draw a parallel, does anyone have any news about Melissa?

[jarmo]

about something else, but given the context I can't help but draw a parallel, does anyone have any news about Melissa?

You can't help but connect her having pneumonia to a lawsuit by a different person? 




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

so even among GNR fans there's some people to take sexual assaulters side.
a reminder, false allegations is around 5% .

95% of the time, it's true.

maybe it's time for these people to listen women.

Yeah, some of these comments are depressing.

[ItsoEezee]

Finally got through reading the filing (270+ pages).  There's no way Guns N' Roses the company (Axl, Duff and Slash) are not settling.  If I am one of those three or their attorneys, "How much do you want to make this go away.  And here's an NDA."  Best case, they might be able to get the judge to dismiss GNR as a party to the case.  Might be tough to do since Lebeis is the manager and represents GNR the interests of GNR the company.

Kat's (the photog) bulk of her complaint is Fernando using her photos and not appropriately crediting her and not paying her per photo use agreements/contracts, during which many extended periods of work were not governed by written contracts.  This strikes me as amazingly dumb of Fernando, if the allegations are true.  I assume that the management team has obscene amounts of money to pay to license photograph use.  I've never managed a band, but thinking about this as a juror, it seems like a non-issue to re-use the previously used contracts and cut the photog checks when you want to use photos. 

The remaining part of the suit is the gross stuff--if true--about Fernando telling Kat he "loves" her and aggressively flirting with, along with a few instances of physical kissing and touching. 

As a fan of the musicians in the band, I'm glad none of them are alleged to have known about any of this stuff.  I know they are not saints and some may very well be huge assholes.  Hopefully justice is served--whatever that ends up being.

[coolman78SLASH]

On social media there are many posts by her liked by Susan, Frank recently so seems like they have not cut ties with her completely

[shaundix]

The folk at Stanford will be surprised to learn that so many of their law professors hang out on a gnr forum in their spare time.

[DeN]

about something else, but given the context I can't help but draw a parallel, does anyone have any news about Melissa?

You can't help but connect her having pneumonia to a lawsuit by a different person? 




/jarmo

Kat is not just "a different person" even if I understand in these particular times everyone in GNR camp would prefer to forget her.

didn't know about the pneumonia, the only "news" I've read about her was her tambourine injury thanks for the update, I hope she gets better soon 

[DeN]

The folk at Stanford will be surprised to learn that so many of their law professors hang out on a gnr forum in their spare time.

 

Internet and its specialists

[jarmo]

Kat is not just "a different person" even if I understand in these particular times everyone in GNR camp would prefer to forget her.

didn't know about the pneumonia, the only "news" I've read about her was her tambourine injury thanks for the update, I hope she gets better soon 

They are two different persons. Just like you and I are.

Yes, hope she's getting better.



/jarmo

[NaturalLight]

The folk at Stanford will be surprised to learn that so many of their law professors hang out on a gnr forum in their spare time.

Hahaha. I was about to say something similar. As someone who is very familiar with contracts, lawsuits, settlements, etc., I'm just shaking my head at some of these comments. GNR hasn't even filed its "Answer" yet.

[jarmo]

As someone who is very familiar with contracts, lawsuits, settlements, etc., I'm just shaking my head at some of these comments. GNR hasn't even filed its "Answer" yet.

Certain people have already made up their minds about this, and the response from the other side probably won't matter to them.




/jarmo

[cineater]

As someone who is very familiar with contracts, lawsuits, settlements, etc., I'm just shaking my head at some of these comments. GNR hasn't even filed its "Answer" yet.

Certain people have already made up their minds about this, and the response from the other side probably won't matter to them.




/jarmo

Have to admit I have a pretty closed mind when it comes to lawyer talk.     It's not their job to give you all the story or both sides.  It's their job to make the other side look bad.  I was always told to only answer yes or no when on the stand.  Don't offer expalinations.  It's the other lawyer's job to get the explaination by asking more yes and no questions.     And sometimes the other lawyer doesn't feel the correct point is not the point they want to make so some shit goes on record as incorrect.

I only skimmed the suit (and spotted all the errors in typing  ).  But was she asking for punative damage against Frenando for sexual harrassment or is that only there to show how she was mislead and mistreated?  The statement from Beta could be totally out of context and have nothing to do with sexual harrassment.  The sexual harrassment may never come up if Kat can't win on the photo stuff.  Either way, Fernando has been labeled.  He doesn't get a real chance to represent his interest?  He's represented only by the band's lawyers and the band's interest?

As they told us in sexual harrassment in the work place training, women who speak up are osterized by the rest of the employees when they do.  I'm thinking a weird thing to say when you're trying to convince everybody they are protected, this isn't right and action will be taken.  But the truth is, you're getting screwed in more ways then one.