Ain't God Good

[redacted] and I personally know each other as both of us went through a women’s job readiness program, Women’s Empowerment. We currently work together and have for the past three year at a separate business.
Women’s Empowerment (WE) host a yearly gala for their current graduates and also invites past grad to their public event as well. Due to the nature of relationship between our current employer and WE, there are a few women at our current place of employment who are invited annually to support their cause.
Thus, this year seven of us that are employed with this employer were invited to attend their public annual gala on June 26, 2014. All seven women, including myself are women who hold many things in common as working together on a daily basis and graduating from WE.
In the past we have all taken pictures together by employee of WE. I currently have pictures at my desk of [redacted] and the other women as well. Our management staff where we are currently employed as has pictures of all of us together.
On the evening mentioned 6/26/14 at Women’s Empowerment public gala [redacted] was happy and obliged all who wanted to take pictures of all of us together. Yes, we all took many group pictures. WE did not expressing state (as the event was public) a no photo policy nor forbid photos. They too also had a video photographer, and staff going around taking different photos of the event. Further, [redacted] did not mention or request to anyone taking photos not to post them on the internet. She willing posed with all women to be posted.
These photos were posted on my website a few weeks later. I received a text message from [redacted] on 7/13/14 at approximately 16:45 stating:
[redacted]
I need your help. Please take my pic off your website. Someone that has been looking for me found my pic on your site. How I don’t know. But he know about WE and that was my safe haven. You need to have consent from the people you post because you don’t know their situations. Please do the ASAP thanks. He finds me her at PI we’re going to have major problem.
My response 7/14/14 6:48am stating:
[redacted],
Sweetie while I can and do respect your wishes to not be on my page, please don’t over exaggerate, lie, or THREATEN me for now I do have a problem with you on the basis that you just threatened me.
I believe this very public link that you yourself have put out lets everyone know where you currently work. The problem you have is with yourself, not me. You have told the world where you work. [redacted]  
** search displayed first, last name, picture, city residing and place of employment. Please note she has not removed herself from being seen in a Facebook search after receiving my text with the above link.
 
Second, I never mentioned anything about women’s empowerment on my site.
The World Wide Web is full of personal information.
I only responded to this text as it appears your being funny and to CYA. We both are grown women [redacted]; in the future you can and should approach me much better than this, and NEVER threaten me again.
End
Later I contacted my attorney in regards to this matter because as initially stated to [redacted], while I can respect her wishes I am not violating any laws or personal rights. I do have a right to consult my attorney, I do have a first amendment rights, I have a right to legally do what is well suited for my business. I also have rights to fight against anyone who is making fraudulent claims against me and my business. 
My First Amendment right states Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Photographs as speech
No Supreme Court decisions directly address a photographer’s First Amendment rights. The rulings closest to that issue involve expressive speech and conduct.
“The First Amendment literally forbids the abridgment only of ‘speech,’ but we have long recognized that its protection does not end at the spoken or written word … we have acknowledged that conduct may be ‘sufficiently imbued with elements of communication to fall within the scope of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.’
“In deciding whether particular conduct possesses sufficient communicative elements to bring the First Amendment into play, we have asked whether [a]n intent to convey a particularized message was present, and [whether] the likelihood was great that the message would be understood by those who viewed it.” Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Six years later, the Supreme Court reiterated, “To achieve First Amendment protection, a plaintiff must show that he possessed: (1) a message to be communicated; and (2) an audience to receive that message, regardless of the medium in which the message is to be expressed.”Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual Group (1995)
So speech or conduct (taking photographs) that satisfies both of the elements above is allowed and protected in the “public forum.” Using this guide, we can look to the courts and find one type of photography that is not protected by the First Amendment: private recreational photography that is for one’s own personal use. 
 
First Amendment Center FREEDOM OF THE PRESS, PRESS RESEARCH
Photography & the First Amendment
[redacted]
LEGAL RESEARCHER
Sunday, January 1, 2012
[redacted]
 
With my research and attorneys advice I am within my full rights and am not violating the rights of [redacted] is being vindictive for reasons that are beyond my knowledge or explanation. I had therefore left all pictures originally posted on my site. Even though I am well within my legal rights and not violating any persons remove the pictures with her in them from my site.

Review: On 6/26/2014 a group of ladies attended a Gala Event for an organization that all of us took part in which has no association with Ain't God Good. At this event pictures of us were taken in good faith, so I thought. Soon after the event 7 pictures are on the website: www.aintgodgood.org -LLC are posted with 2 pictures that I am in. 7/14/2014 sent a personal text to the owner requesting my 2 personal pictures be removed since I did not consent to being are the website. I want no association to this business at all. This business has not done anything for me in any aspect of my life and I do not want to be a associated with this business. On 7/15/2015 she replied "sweetie while I can and will respect your wishes to not be on my page" + more. I take that statement right there as my pictures will be removed. Checking today 7/27/2014 my pictures of myself have not yet been removed.Desired Settlement: Remove the 2 pictures that I am in. First and last group pictures ASAP

Business

Response:

Please excuse the delay in response. I did not receive the initial notification.

Attached you will find my response and the two pictures in mention