IANAL, but isn't that why the designation of legal guardian exists--to allow someone else to make decisions on behalf of someone else?
I think the point you are trying to make is that a legal guardian cannot offer consent that is unlawful, as such consent would not be valid.
Perhaps that is the angle the plantiff is going for--that any oral consent given is unlawful and voided because the image was used in a pornographic way.
I think the point you are trying to make is that a legal guardian cannot offer consent that is unlawful, as such consent would not be valid.
Perhaps that is the angle the plantiff is going for--that any oral consent given is unlawful and voided because the image was used in a pornographic way.