Bride Sues Videographer After Embarrassing Wedding Footage Goes Viral

If you hire a videographer for your next special occasion, be careful what you do on camera.

A recently married California bride is suing her wedding videographer after footage of an embarrassing moment at their wedding went viral last year.

The clip shows the woman’s drunken husband trying to remove her garter belt and falling down on top of her.

While it seems like a clickable, hilarious video for the rest of us to watch, the couple didn’t find it too funny – especially after they had gone to lengths to hide the original video.


Now, the couple is suing George Street Photo and Video, seeking over $120,000 in compensation for “intentional infliction of emotional distress.”

The bride – Jane Doe, to protect her identity – claims that additional footage she and her husband were not aware of was posted online and quickly racked up millions of views. It was shared on sites like The Huffington Post, e! online and Cosmopolitan, in addition to all kinds of social media.

Though she’s tried to have the video removed a number of times, the footage keeps popping up online. Originally uploaded to YouTube, the clip left the couple “shocked, mortified, anguished, humiliated and shamed,” according to the lawsuit.

As for George Street Photo and Video, this is the first time they’ve found themselves in such a mess.

“In our 12 year history of capturing, editing, and delivering thousands of wedding photos and videos, we have never experienced anything like this,” said the George Street founders in a statement to NBC. “We are very disappointed and upset by this situation, and we have spent considerable time removing our video from the Internet.”

In the eyes of many, they didn’t exactly do anything wrong.


Technically, the company owns the video.

Even though the couple paid for the videographer’s services and appear in the video, it is considered creative work and property of the author.

“Any photograph by any photographer is considered creative work, that belongs to the author — the photographer — and they have full rights,” University of San Francisco law professor Robert Talbot told NBC.

Whether or not you chose to exploit the intimate moments of others comes down to a matter of personal tact.

So read the fine print and choose your videographer wisely. It’s easier to do so than to suppress your drunken behaviour in fear that you could end up splashed across the Internet.

[ninja_form id=104]