Quote:
Originally Posted by k0nr4d
People should of course be honest in business and come in with good intentions but if the judgement against girlsdoporn was because the models didn't read what they were signing, does this not make the whole concept of a written contract absolutely worthless?
|
You have to remember there was a scheme/conspiracy involving the producers, make-up artists, videographers, the secretary, fake former models paid to claim their videos were never put online. All these people working together to convince the models their videos wouldn't be posted online and nobody would find out. Which was all a lie. And it was all backed up by testimony and depositions.
In the USA you can't misrepresent a contract.
A misrepresentation is a false statement of a material fact made by one party which affects the other party's decision in agreeing to a contract. If the misrepresentation is discovered, the contract can be declared void and, depending on the situation; the adversely impacted party may seek damages.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m...esentation.asp
This is a textbook case of misrepresentation, hence the judgement.