Model Suing Apple Over Stolen iPhoto Pictures

[Guest]

If she was a little smarter and thought long term, she could have applied as a model instead of suing Apple. Fashion designers are fanatic about apple, they won't take this lady lightly if she ever comes on their door steps.

 

[TheCapulet]

[citation][nom]The Greater Good[/nom]It's funny when chicks take slutty pics then get mad when someone posts them on the Net. HELLO WOMEN!!! CAN YOU HEAR ME!!!?? IF YOU DON'T WANT THESE PICS ON THE NET, DO NOT TAKE THEM!!! It's that easy.[/citation]
Your caps-lock privileges have been revoked.

I really don't understand how you guys are bashing this girl as stupid. She's a model.(or so the article says). She sells images of herself for a living. A company used images of her without payment or permission. She's suing them, as any model in the business would.

If this were Tyra Banks, this would have been an apple bashing comment section instead. You guys need to find some common sense.

 

[tacoslave]

[citation][nom]TheCapulet[/nom]Your caps-lock privileges have been revoked. I really don't understand how you guys are bashing this girl as stupid. She's a model.(or so the article says). She sells images of herself for a living. A company used images of her without payment or permission. She's suing them, as any model in the business would. If this were Tyra Banks, this would have been an apple bashing comment section instead. You guys need to find some common sense.[/citation]
[citation][nom]TheCapulet[/nom]Your caps-lock privileges have been revoked. I really don't understand how you guys are bashing this girl as stupid. She's a model.(or so the article says). She sells images of herself for a living. A company used images of her without payment or permission. She's suing them, as any model in the business would. If this were Tyra Banks, this would have been an apple bashing comment section instead. You guys need to find some common sense.[/citation]

i think tyra banks is annoying imho

 

[rohitbaran]

Aspiring model

"I was just upset that I'm not being paid for my pictures," she told the New York Post. "I'm not embarrassed."

Kind of shows that this is a dumb publicity stunt, an attempt to shoot to fame.

 

[liveonc]

Who even uses a real face anymore, without digital enhancements? Nobody is too special not to have bigger eyes, a slightly different nose, a forehead that's bigger or smaller, etc, etc. If they bothered to do that, can a person even sue, because it's not really them? There's a billion photos of a billion different people, who could just as well be someone else, or a digitally enhanced person who doesn't even exist.

 

[NuclearShadow]

She has every right to sue. It is her photo and due to the digital millenium copyright act
the photo is copyrighted and thus legally hers. So any company that profits from this
photo or uses it is breaking copyright laws. Also anyone who profits from the
copyright violation even unknowingly is still responsible for such. So in this case
Apple can be sued. Granted suing Apple isn't the moral thing to do as they were unknowing.
In fact due to her popularity she should try to use this as a way to upstart her modeling
career and perhaps work for Apple doing commercials and other forms of advertising

Also do not think for one second this is some sort of rare occurance where pictures are stolen
from everyday people and used in such ways. Many weight loss ads with the before and after pictures steal the pics online are actually stolen from weight loss forums. Then the ad says
they used the method advertised when that couldn't be further from the truth.

Strangely enough this happened to one of my wife's weight loss buddies on one of the forums
and that very ad was put on this very site as well as tons of others.

 

[mayankleoboy1]

more pics of the model please

 

[face-plants]

[citation][nom]jeykev78[/nom]umm, did you actually read the article? It has nothing to do with the manufacturer of her computer or anything like that. She is suing the particular app developer for using her picture without her permission and is suing Apple for distributing said application and thus her picture. Thats all it is.[/citation]

Did YOU really read the article? It was only a few paragraphs but let me paraphrase it....


"The pics were used without her permission in 'eXtreme Cam Girls' ".... "Battino says the pictures were stolen from her computer but refused to discuss who might have stolen them or how they may have gone about it"

Someone copied her pics from her PC and sold em or posted em online. Apple had nothing to do with this but built the PC. If I run you over for no reason in my car are you gonna sue Toyota?

I totally agree with an earlier post that the publicity she gets from this is worth more than she'll ever get from the frivolous lawsuit. Case gets thrown own and everyone knows her name

 

[reconspartan]

I didn't read all of the comments so maybe someone already addressed this but where did it say the pics that were being distributed were nudes(some people were bitching about her being underage)?

A.) I thought that Apple won't allow porn to be published to their app store. => not nude
B.) With suggested evidence above, pictures of the then 16y.o. wouldn't be illegal.

To clarify, pictures of people under 18 are not inherently illegal, even if they're modeling. Only if it is a "sexual setting" is it considered porn i.e. nude, dry humping etc. I don't give a shit about her lawsuit I just don't like nanny laws and the misinterpretation of nanny laws.. 16 is old enough imo.

 

[abhijeet1982]

these type of girls/women doesnt have charachter as they beleave that they can make money even out of their sillyness . and the last comment "I'm not embarrassed." is showing her rudeness and and shamefull for other respectable women. these type of photos must be published in such xcam girls like websites without any compensation/fee, and even court should scold her for shameless behaviour .

 

[imakuzim]

[citation][nom]jupiter optimus maximus[/nom]If she was a little smarter and thought long term, she could have applied as a model instead of suing Apple. Fashion designers are fanatic about apple, they won't take this lady lightly if she ever comes on their door steps.[/citation]

Who needs modelling if she win the lawsuit

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]Renegade_Warrior[/nom]If there is anything to be embarrassed about (showing anything that should not be showing), then the photos would be covered under child pornography laws.If you are under age 99.9% of the time, you get the shaft even if you didn't do anything illegal yourself other than doing something stupid such as taking nude photos of yourself or consensual sex with another of the same age, etc, etc, etc....[/citation]
Does it says somewhere in the article that she's nude?

 

[distanted]

Several words come to mind, none of them being 'victim'. I'm not sure how much damages she can recover for not being paid for her child pornography. Emotional distress would have been an easier route...had she not told the Post that there was no emotional distress. Any fame she's likely to gain will be over quickly and all she can add to her 'modeling' resume is: I took dirty pictures of myself and then sued anyone who came in contact with them. That should have clients lining up.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]face-plants[/nom]Did YOU really read the article? It was only a few paragraphs but let me paraphrase it...."The pics were used without her permission in 'eXtreme Cam Girls' ".... "Battino says the pictures were stolen from her computer but refused to discuss who might have stolen them or how they may have gone about it"Someone copied her pics from her PC and sold em or posted em online. Apple had nothing to do with this but built the PC. If I run you over for no reason in my car are you gonna sue Toyota?I totally agree with an earlier post that the publicity she gets from this is worth more than she'll ever get from the frivolous lawsuit. Case gets thrown own and everyone knows her name[/citation]
She's suing Apple because is distributing the app, not because it was stolen from her Apple or whatever computer she has.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]distanted[/nom]Several words come to mind, none of them being 'victim'. I'm not sure how much damages she can recover for not being paid for her child pornography. Emotional distress would have been an easier route...had she not told the Post that there was no emotional distress. Any fame she's likely to gain will be over quickly and all she can add to her 'modeling' resume is: I took dirty pictures of myself and then sued anyone who came in contact with them. That should have clients lining up.[/citation]
The picture in question isn't porn and I don't know where people got the idea it that the picture was porn. She is suing Apple and Samba Studios because they are using a picture of her without her consent. And while Samba Studios and Apple may be getting money from her picture she isn't receiving a dime. She has every right to sue. If they want to use a picture of her they must license it first.

 

[TheCapulet]

[citation][nom]tacoslave[/nom]i think tyra banks is annoying imho[/citation]
Agreed. I think Family Guy pretty much sums up my view of her. And IMO, she's not that attractive.

 

[alyoshka]

Apples is going to stop the distribution of that App from it's store..... Compensation is going to be minimal...... cos the app isn't going to show such a big lot of users...

 

[The_Trutherizer]

If she get's paid then would that not be tantamount to her being a underage porn vendor? Hmmm People should teach their children better.

 

[demonhorde665]

[citation][nom]Renegade_Warrior[/nom]Even dumber.....She admits that she shot the photos of herself when she was 16Can anyone say under age minor?A can of worms may have been opened just by her having admitted the aged at which the photos were taken, which in turn could possibly get her in a heap of trouble.[/citation]


where did teh article say they were nude pictures ????

i read the word Sexy some where in teha rticle but no where did it say her pictures were nudes , often and even porn sites will use a "cover" girls that is goergous , biut doesn't actually appear any where on the site nude, jsut as a selling point.

so her pictures might not ahve even been naked , however the stigmatism of even being a "cover" girls for such a web site coudlhurt some one's career if that is a person's concern. point being i don't think she';d be useing for money only if they were nude pics since pics of minors does open a big fat can of worms (for them not her ).

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]nuke_meltdown[/nom]"I was just upset that I'm not being paid for my pictures,"....Welcome in the real world, how much do you think your pretty face worth????[/citation]
How about the value of the cost of the App with her pictures on, multiplied by the number of downloads?

Welcome to the real world