|
Forums >
Model Colloquy >
Suicide Girls Contract Exclusivity
Feb 04 13 10:45 pm Link You could message those girls specifically and ask them, since they would have first hand knowledge, rather than the unwashed masses just taking guesses and regurgitating what they think they heard from someone somewhere at some point. Feb 04 13 10:52 pm Link Feb 05 13 01:41 am Link SG was sued in the California courts over those restrictive agreements they were making with the MODELS [but not the photographer's agreements] About Feb 2008 the court entered a judgement against SG and voided all previous model agreements and told SG they could not use them, or anything like them, any longer. So they were changed but not out of the kindness of SG themselves. SG was forced to do it. Studio36 Feb 05 13 05:17 am Link Feb 05 13 05:25 am Link Reverend White Rabbit wrote: Here's the relevant part of the court ruling "The Court finds that, in any matters determined at trial. Plaintiff God's Girls LCC is entitled to judgment as a matter of law that each and every version of SG Services, Inc's model release, including but not limited to those attached as Exhibits to the operative Complaint on file in this exaction, are void and invalid as a matter of law, at least to the extent that the releases are intended to provide that a model is "exclusive" to SG Services, Inc. and/or to prohibit a model from modeling or otherwise providing services for God's Girls LLC." It is fair to say that even this leaves some questions unanswered, but for the casual model it resulted in a far more free position vis a vis modelling elsewhere. Feb 05 13 05:35 am Link Feb 05 13 10:12 am Link I know that Vivid Vivka is on CosplayDeviants, SuicudeGirls, and Zivity as she tends to talk about all three on her FB page and on Zivity. I know she is very successful on Zivity and listed as on of the top CosplayDeviants models in the CD FAQ. I do not know about SG. RazorCandi is a really nice one to ask questions as she has always responded back to me quite quickly. I would guess that Oki Doki Okami is good at getting back as well, though I have never asked her anything personally. Not sure what range of sites she is on however. Feb 05 13 11:08 am Link Feb 05 13 05:50 pm Link Reverend White Rabbit wrote: I think that is the heart of the matter, isn't it? Feb 05 13 06:00 pm Link Why even consider those F'n schmucks, they can go pound sand with their contract!! Feb 05 13 06:09 pm Link Reverend White Rabbit wrote: You need to talk to a lawyer for legal advice (which I am not)…but I would say you would be breaching the photography contract you signed with SG. However I would think you safe to do a self-shot series for SG but always use a photographer (not yourself) for other avenues. Feb 05 13 06:16 pm Link Feb 05 13 06:17 pm Link Feb 05 13 06:38 pm Link I'm curious about your idea of "veteran" models and that they're "starting to work" for SG I've seen quite the opposite. Newbies getting into sg and veteran models staying in but branching out everywhere else possible, or just getting out. The sg market is flooded, if you weren't there years ago its going to be far more difficult to get yourself up to "insert name of popular sg girl here" status. By all means if its something you want to do and are comfortable with the contracts, do it, but as per your earlier comment that it will be "be interesting to see where sg goes in the future".... It's going to be going the way of irrelevant, it's the only way it can go. Sg had their heyday when most the girls applying now weren't even legal. Feb 05 13 11:30 pm Link NM Feb 06 13 02:19 am Link The terms as currently written make most halfway decent photographers VERY leery of assisting a prospective model in submitting photos. There is still a non-competition clause in place that prevents photographers from not working with other similarly themed sites for a period of two years *after* their vetting process which itself can happen any time up to a year after submission. And these are for the 'free' Hopefuls. So yes, Suicide Girls is asking photographers not to work with any other sites that may include goth or punk girls ... without any guaranteed compensation whatsoever. Oh yeah, almost forgot ... you're also not allowed to announce your availability to do SG shoots, or solicit for such. Ever. So basically, you're screwed. And then people wonder why serious photographers and models have such contempt for them. Feb 06 13 09:35 am Link Feb 06 13 12:51 pm Link Karl Barbosa wrote: The real intent of which is, of course, that you "can" choose your own photographer. But they really want you to use them/theirs (and pay nicely for the privilege). Feb 06 13 05:14 pm Link rule #1: don't work with scumbags. sg is run by scumbags. Feb 07 13 06:05 pm Link If SG were the only outlet for my photography I'd give up and quit rather than work for them.... Feb 09 13 02:44 pm Link Dekilah wrote: I talked to her briefly about something else and she was really nice. Feb 09 13 03:33 pm Link I can only speak for BlueBlood.com and I've certainly heard that some sites have run into headaches with SG, so of course you should always do your own due diligence. Only one person who worked for SG has ever turned down work from BlueBlood.com because of it and that was Zak Sabbath, who is a painter and not a model, so I would guess that is a different situation. SG has worked with models after BlueBlood.com already had (not surprising as Blue Blood has been around almost a decade longer) and there are models who work with both BlueBlood.com and SG simultaneously. FWIW, someone I believe to be a member of SG ownership directly contacted me saying they don't consider our sites to be competing, but I think the fact that talent overlap has never been an issue is the more relevant thing. Not to put too fine a point on it, I think sweating competition is a silly pastime for insecure children. BlueBlood.com directly promotes GodsGirls and BA when we have talent overlap and used to promote DeviantNation when they were around and is actually partnered with EBPM for affiliate stuff. Feb 11 13 06:22 pm Link RazorCandi is NOT an SG. She's still a hopeful. The contract that we sign says that we cannot model for paid members-only nude sites. Basically, no competition sites like GodsGirls [I don't know why a girl would choose to be on both at the same time anyway]. A ton of SG girls are doing Zivity and other projects. The contract isn't as cutthroat as everyone makes it seem. It's very reasonable. :] Feb 11 13 11:50 pm Link I'm a SuicideGirl myself  - look for Lauretta on the site, I'm not posting direct link as I don't think it's allowed on this forum. I was modeling before becoming a SuicideGirl and I'm still modeling a lot after, never had issues of any kind with photographers or publications. But yes, if you are interested in modeling for other sites, keep in mind we can't work with competitors - basically, "sites featuring tattooed and alternative models", which means nothing: best way is always email Missy about it and see what she answer. Zivity and Front Army, for sample, are totally okay. But obviously, God'sGirls and Deviant Nation (is it still up?!) are not. Vivid Vivka is the living proof that you can be a popular alt model AND a SuicideGirl at the same time! Feb 13 13 10:39 am Link You are allowed to model for publications but not competing websites...when in doubt just email them and ask if whatever website you are considering is competition. Feb 17 13 02:27 pm Link I just signed my SG contracts, at least as hopeful status, and what I had to sign and what my photographer had to sign were both only about a paragraph long, and there is no hidden fine print, and everything is laid out in very simple terms... Sign up look over the contracts and until you sign them it means nothing.. But I was pleasantly surprised as to the changes they have made since I first considered them when I was 18 years old.. I found nothing that scared me away this time Apr 30 13 04:46 pm Link |
