Picture of french door used in commercial without consent

[whentoquit]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA
I recently saw a tv commercial for a well known window installer and low and behold there was a picture of my side entrance french door in the commercial. Do i have any legal right to compensation to this airing? The company did install windows in my home 7 years ago but did not install the french door. The door had to be reinstalled by me because a family member did not install it correctly and the stucco job that i did to the outside wall around the door was done poorly. The commercial is stating in the particular section of video that in order to not to have to alter the framing structure of the house,(there is another picture of someone else's house for window purposes), you should have it properly measured, instead of using prefabbed windows from other companies or doors i presume. They did not ask nor did i see anywhere in the contract anything stating that they could take pictures of my house. The picture is extremely identifiable of the said french door because of the stucco job i did and is still in the same condition, it is also a full picture showing the complete door and bad stucco job. Did not have to alter the structure of the house, just a bad stucco job. I feel that in light of this negative insinuation that they should be held liable. Do i have any legal recourse since they were allowed on the property in the first place. The commercial is running right now in the Philadelphia area and i do not know how long is has been airing. Any help in any direction from anyone would be greatly appreciated. I was going to DVR the commercial but i had seen in other places that i might not have any recourse in this matter. Should I?

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

And what do you think would be a fair fee?

 

[Zigner]

I don't understand why you think you are due anything...

 

[xylene]

Ask them in writing for 10 grand or some reasonable demand for not securing rights to use your property in a commercial and for disparaging the your home and damaging it's value.

 

[Zigner]

Ask them in writing for 10 grand or some reasonable demand for not securing rights to use your property in a commercial and for disparaging the your home and damaging it's value.

Is "disparaging" a home a compensable claim? What proof does the OP have of ANY damage to the value of his property that is caused by the use of a photo?

 

[xylene]

Is "disparaging" a home a compensable claim? What proof does the OP have of ANY damage to the value of his property that is caused by the use of a photo?

The identifiable photo and the the claim are the problem. Claiming structural damage which is not present on broadcast television seems very problematic.

A letter of demand, directly in writing for nominal compensation seems a reasonable first step. They could make a counter offer. (Which I would accept) They could realize they trashed a guy on TV with his consent or his interest even in mind...

Honestly, the expense of an appraiser and a lawyer seem premature.

 

[Zigner]

The identifiable photo and the the claim are the problem. Claiming structural damage which is not present on broadcast television seems very problematic.

It's "identifiable" because the OP knows his own house. I don't get the impression that the door is visible from the street because the contractor needed to be in the back yard to take the photo.

A letter of demand, directly in writing for nominal compensation seems a reasonable first step. They could make a counter offer. (Which I would accept) They could realize they trashed a guy on TV with his consent or his interest even in mind...

I don't disagree with this in principle, however, a huge dollar figure ($10k is huge to a contractor) is likely going to make the guy just clam up and ignore it.

Honestly, the expense of an appraiser and a lawyer seem premature.

I agree with this.

 

[adjusterjack]

Should I?

Reality check. Do what you want but you are in for a big fail.

 

[quincy]

Is "disparaging" a home a compensable claim? What proof does the OP have of ANY damage to the value of his property that is caused by the use of a photo?

There is "slander of title" but this requires that statements made about a property are false. There does not appear to be anything false said about the installation of the French doors by whentoquit.

I see no legal action to pursue, or any reasonable claim for compensation to be made, based on what has been said.

 

[Zigner]

Just to be clear: The use of the photo in a commercial isn't what causes a decrease in property value. No, it's the crummy plastering that's causing that. Honestly, this commercial may actually cause the OP's property value to increase (albeit, indirectly). It might just motivate the OP to fix the crummy plaster job.

 

[whentoquit]

I don't understand why you think you are due anything...

How are they allowed to use the photo to benefit their commercial application for profit and at the same time portray a disparaging view of work that they had no connection to? That's what i don't understand. They are making a profit off of the use of which they had no legal authorization to use.

 

[whentoquit]

And what do you think would be a fair fee?

I do not know, that is why i am bouncing this question to more experienced individuals as those on this site.

 

[whentoquit]

It's "identifiable" because the OP knows his own house. I don't get the impression that the door is visible from the street because the contractor needed to be in the back yard to take the photo.

I don't disagree with this in principle, however, a huge dollar figure ($10k is huge to a contractor) is likely going to make the guy just clam up and ignore it.

I agree with this.

This contractor is a MAJOR player in the home remodeling business in the US. Even if i were to pursue this, $10k would not dent their pocketbook.

 

[Zigner]

Well, have at it then. Prove that their use of a photo that they took while they were permitted on your property, and which can't be specifically identified as your house (except by a tiny fraction of a tiny percent of people in the US), has harmed you.

 

[whentoquit]

Just to be clear: The use of the photo in a commercial isn't what causes a decrease in property value. No, it's the crummy plastering that's causing that. Honestly, this commercial may actually cause the OP's property value to increase (albeit, indirectly). It might just motivate the OP to fix the crummy plaster job.

Believe me, if i had the monetary means it would have been done already.