Sounds like someone heard a story about a bad photographer getting sued and now these people think can do the same thing. I am interested in seeing the photos..

i hope for the photographers to win the trail

You wrote 3.8k plus 150k but in the video you say plus 15k – which is right (not that it would make the case any better)…

Hello Lin and Pye, Do you have any sample
of a good Wedding – Photography Contract? As
well as a 2nd Shooter’s Contract.

I am a lawyer (in Canada) and an avid amateur photographer, and I have just this bit of advice:

(1) I assume professional photographers have insurance for various purposes, and if not they really ought to: it’s hard to run a business these days without insurance. Now, although it may be costly to purchase, professionals should seriously consider purchasing protection for professional liability, negligence, and errors and omissions (E&O) insurance coverage. This basically means that if you have this kind of insurance coverage, and if you were sued like Mr. Tang was, your insurer would take over your defense: a lawyer would be hired by your insurance company to defend on your behalf. Again, though it may cost to have full-spectrum insurance of this kind up front (and there may be deductibles,etc), it might result in significant savings in the long term if you ever ran into trouble of this kind. It’s really great that this case is being publicized and people are contributing to Mr. Tang’s defense, but I’m assuming not all professional photographers can consistently rely on the photographer community coming together in this way to help out.

(2) The lawyer’s “demand letter”, as read by Gary Fong, is truly appalling and highly unprofessional, to say the least. I’ve never come across anything quite as bad as that – just unbelievable! Mr. Tang should seriously consider submitting a complaint against the lawyer/client/plaintiff to the law society or bar association (or whatever lawyers’ governing bodies might be called down in the US) in his jurisdiction. At a bare minimum, the letter constitutes (a fairly obvious and fairly extreme example of) “sharp practice”, i.e., form of unethical legal practice. Lawyers’ governing bodies (bar associations, law societies, etc.) usually take such matters quite seriously, especially when there are threats of the kind this lawyer/client/plaintiff made use of.

Just one note: unfortunately, unless this lawyer/client/plaintiff forgot to mark the “demand letter” as being “without prejudice” (which he probably did), the letter would likely not be seen by the trial judge – pre-litigation correspondence (especially pre-litigation settlement negotiations) normally do not form part of the trial on the merits. So, as much as it would be great to have the case tossed out just on the basis of a judge reading the letter, that’s not likely to happen. However, if Mr. Fong’s description of the circumstances is accurate, and if Mr. Tang’s defense lawyer is any good, and if the lawyer/client/plaintiff keeps up that kind of attitude in the lawsuit, there’s a good chance it can be tossed out for being frivolous, vexatious, etc. – in which case it would be the lawyer/client/plaintiff who would be hit with considerable costs in favor of Mr. Tang.

Best of luck to Mr. Tang – I’m sure things will work out in his favor in the end.