Reply to Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Isn’t this irrelevant to the case? [/quote]

It’s relevant to the question of whether or not she was an employee. Wayfarer is arguing, and I agree, that she had far too much power to be considered an employee. If she is ruled an independent contractor she can’t even bring her title 7 claims.[/quote]

I don't think the squabbling over which cut was released is relevant to whether or not she was an employee on the set. Wayfarer was the shooting studio, they ran the set. The question is whether or not Lively was an employee or an independent contractor *on that set* since that's where the alleged harassment is supposed to have taken place.

All the stuff about which cut was released is related to post-production, distribution, and marketing. Sony was the distribution studio. Blake isn't suing Sony and there's no conversation about whether she was an employee of Sony's.

I just don't think which cut Sony chose to release has any bearing on whether Blake was an employee on the set of the movie. They are separate operations, as per the agreement between Wayfarer and Sony.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics