HIV Negative Model Sues After Her Image Was Used in HIV+ Ad

HIV ad

Imagine waking up to find out the world believes you have HIV/AIDS but you are perfectly healthy.

A Brooklyn model is suing the world’s largest photo wire service for selling her photo to be used in a HIV+ advertisement.

The NY Post reports that Avril Nolan, 25, is suing Getty Images for $450,000 for emotional distress after seeing the ad in a NY newspaper.

From NY Post:

The ads’ implication that she had the dreaded disease has hurt her personal and professional relationships and caused her emotional distress, she says in the suit.

The suit says Nolan found out about the ad only after she was alerted by a Facebook friend and her Pilates exercise instructor to a quarter-page color ad that ran in the free AM New York newspaper on April 3.

Next to her face were the words, “I am positive (+),” and, “I have rights.”

The ad was paid for by the state Division of Human Rights.

Nolan, who works in p.r., says a New York photographer, Jena Cumbo, snapped the shot years ago but “had no written release or authorization” to use or sell it.

Nolan is also suing the state’s Division of Human Rights for an undisclosed sum of money.



 


25 Responses to “HIV Negative Model Sues After Her Image Was Used in HIV+ Ad”

  1. 1
    TeaIsFinallyHere says:

    I hope she gets paid. Im sure she was mortified by the whole ordeal.

  2. 2
  3. 3
    A.J. says:

    Good Morning Sandra!! :waves:

    Teal
    Puppylove

  4. 4
    WUT U GONE DO WITH THAT LIL THANG?!! :rofl: says:

    GOOD MORNING YALL! :waves:

    If she sold her pic to a stock photography company…she may not have a case.

  5. 5
    Brownskin Cutie says:

    Good morning yall!!!

  6. 6
    Caramel Rain says:

    :rofl: wow.

  7. 7
    A.J. says:

    She don’t hardly look like no model either :lol:

  8. 8
    Shuga Honey says:

    thats stupid. actors & actresses can play the role of anything, including HIV patients.

    she’ll never work in this town again! :rules:

    aint nobody told her to be so scrawny :tea:

  9. 9
    goat76 says:

    $450,000? That’s all? She missing another set of 000′s

  10. 10

    THIS IS A DRIVEBY!!!!

    Good Morning Loves! :wave:

    Well this sucks! Wut she gave no authorization to sell the pic or for anyone to use it.

    She looks rather…. :think: …regular though..

    I hope she gets paid. They completely messed up her money flow liket that.

  11. 11

    goat76 says:

    $450,000? That’s all? She missing another set of 000?s
    ————
    She’s suing that one company for that much and the other company for an undisclosed amount. #helpful

    :D

  12. 12
    luVn_liFe... says:

    :wave: Morning Roses :yahoo: TGIF!!

    Seems like she has a case… Kinda->“had no written release or authorization” to use or sell it.

    However
    Im sure that “modeling” agencies Get you to sign Releases for these type of things.

    A few years ago I drew a name out of a hat for an ipad winner at My denstist office.They took a few pics of me pulling the name and posing with the dentist.
    I Had to sign a release :think:

  13. 13
    MisTaken :cell: The Black Mamba says:

    This was wrong if she didn’t sign a release clause. Be careful what you sign off to :rules: These corporations with play you a flat rate and use your images for decades :no:

  14. 14

    Ok Love Y’all but I gotta go!! TTYL :thankyou: <<<—really says :bye:

  15. 15
    Shuga Honey says:

    she prolly let Jena’s man :sheep: and Jena was like i’ll show you!

    manufactured crisis. making up shyt to entertain myself because thats what we do round here.

  16. 16
    Shuga Honey says:

    RAZZLE is the :champ: , not a BEDAZZLED tramp. :nono: says:

    Ok Love Y’all but I gotta go!! TTYL <<<—really says

    :cya:

  17. 17
    MisTaken :cell: The Black Mamba says:

    Is it one to go home :waiting:

  18. 18
    WUT U GONE DO WITH THAT LIL THANG?!! :rofl: says:

    RAZZLE is the :champ: , not a BEDAZZLED tramp. :nono: says:

    THIS IS A DRIVEBY!!!!

    Good Morning Loves! :wave:

    Well this sucks! Wut she gave no authorization to sell the pic or for anyone to use it.
    ——————————
    Well just how did they get the picture? Did she agree to do a photoshoot with a photographer? Did she read the fine print before taking the picture? This is what I am saying. Remember when Fantasia got mad because they used an old picture of her in a magazine…fine print will kick yo azz everytime. An up and coming model are usual preys to this. All they see is they are getting paid to do a shoot. They think this is expressly for that one time use. But the photographer or the artist of that picture can have sole rights to that picture you allowed them to take. Do you think the Enquirer and all the gossip columns get permission to use crazy photo of celebs to bash them? nope they get purchase them from the artist that created them..the photographer…

  19. 19
    OutsidetheBox says:

    So that’s a modah :eek:

  20. 20
    luVn_liFe... says:

    :newpost: :shock: :newpost: :shock:

  21. 21
    WUT U GONE DO WITH THAT LIL THANG?!! :rofl: says:

    MisTaken :cell: The Black Mamba says:

    This was wrong if she didn’t sign a release clause. Be careful what you sign off to :rules: These corporations with play you a flat rate and use your images for decades :no:
    ——————–
    YEEEP. Read the fine print you are giving that company rights to utilize your picture for their gain. Unless the contract states for that ONE TIME USE TO Be use specifically for this day and nothing more…you are screwed… :tea: If you said you signed the paper saying you give XYZ company to use your image for the FUTURE use in the product sales of the company blah blah blah.. they can put your face anywhere and you cant do nothing bout it…

  22. 22
    Shuga Honey says:

    so you really think everybody on Hot Ghetto Mess dot com gave prior authorization?

    :rofl:

  23. 23
    Anna says:

    WUT U GONE DO WITH THAT LIL THANG?!! :rofl: says:

    GOOD MORNING YALL!

    If she sold her pic to a stock photography company…she may not have a case.

    ~~~~~~~
    If you have pics on social media sites, they can take them and use them to sell their products. A woman has a law suit, her pic was used from(social media)to sell porn.

  24. 24
    Carrington says:

    And she ain’t gone get a damn dollar.

    I’ll bet she signed a release giving the photographer rights to use that pic however he saw fit. So, bye!

  25. 25
    tintin1979 says:

    so you really think everybody on Hot Ghetto Mess dot com gave prior authorization?

    :rofl: HAHHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHA

Comments are closed for this post