Myskina v. Conde Nast Publications, Inc.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
386 F. Supp. 2d 409 (2005)
- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
Anastasia Myskina (plaintiff) was a 20-year-old top-ranked female tennis player. Myskina was a Russian citizen and was not fluent in English. An editor with Conde Nast Publications, Inc. (Conde Nast) (defendant) asked Myskina’s agent if Myskina would agree to be photographed for an issue of Gentleman’s Quarterly (GQ), a magazine. Myskina’s agent agreed, and Myskina went to a photoshoot for the magazine. The photographer was Mark Seliger (defendant). Myskina agreed to be photographed in the nude for the magazine cover. According to Myskina, her agreement was only given after Conde Nast and Seliger agreed to only use the photographs for the magazine. Myskina signed a release form drafted by Conde Nast, consenting to the use of the photographs by Conde Nast and others for editorial purposes. The release did not restrict the publication of the photographs. The release also did not contain a merger clause. Seliger completed the photoshoot for GQ. Seliger also took additional photographs of Myskina after the main photoshoot, but according to Myskina, Seliger agreed not to publish these photographs anywhere. These additional photographs depicted Myskina topless in blue jeans. Subsequently, Seliger licensed the photographs to another magazine, which published the photographs. Myskina sued Conde Nast and Seliger for breach of contract. Conde Nast and Seliger moved for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mukasey, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.