PHOTOGRAPHY
SERVCIES |
|
PORTRAIT
PHOTOGRAPHY |
|
Executive Portrait Photographer |
Headshot /
Passport
Portrait Photographer |
|
High School Senior Portrait Photographer |
High School Underclass (9-11)
Photographer |
|
Middle School Photographer |
|
Elementary School Photographer |
|
Pre-School Photographer |
|
SPORTS PHOTOGRAPHY |
|
Sports Portrait Photographer |
|
High School Sports Candid Photography |
|
FAMILY PORTRAITS |
|
Pregnancy Photography |
|
Newborn / Baby Photography |
|
Children's Photography |
|
Family Portrait Photographer |
|
Couples Photographer |
|
COMMERCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY |
|
Event Photography |
|
Real Estate Photography |
|
Virtual Tours |
|
WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY |
|
Bridal Boudoir Photographer |
|
MODEL PHOTOGRAPHY |
|
Actors Headshot Photographer |
|
Model Portfolio Photographer |
|
Teen Model Portfolio Photographer |
|
Glamour Photographer |
|
Comp Card Photographer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
On Time Photography does NOT accept unsolicited advertisements.
If you send an unsolicited Spam Fax to On Time Photography,
you WILL BE billed a minimum of US$500.00 for each fax received.
A federal law enacted in 1991 called the "Telephone
Consumer Protection Act" (the "Act") provides that "It shall be unlawful for any
person within the United States . . . to use any telephone facsimile machine,
computer, or other device to send an unsolicited advertisement to a telephone
facsimile machine." 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1). The federal law also
provides that "A person or entity may . . . bring in an appropriate court . . .
an action . . . to receive $500 in damages for each such violation . . . . If
the court finds that the defendant willfully or knowingly violated this
subsection or the regulations . . . .", the court may
triple the damage award.
See 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3) (emphasis added).
For information about the Act, see the article entitled "Junk
Fax Law - the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991," which can be viewed on
the internet at
http://www.keytlaw.com/faxes/junkfaxlaw.htm.
This article contains links to the complete statute, the federal regulations
interpreting the Act, several junk fax articles and articles on a recent class
action lawsuit called "Nicholson
v. Hooters of Augusta, Inc.," (Richmond County, Georgia, Superior Court case
number 95-RCCV-616). Hooters hired a fax service that sent six unsolicited junk
faxes to each of 1,321 fax numbers. In April of 2001, the court ordered Hooters
to pay treble damages of $11,889,000.
|