Model Suing Apple Over Stolen iPhoto Pictures

[CptTripps]

[citation][nom]sandmanwn[/nom]She wasn't working for them. They were stolen pictures. RTFA!!![/citation]

I'm not sure he was saying that she was. I think he was just making a point about disrepute.

 

[chick0n]

She is just a whore, thats how I see it.

 

[Guest]

It's amazing how people quickly assume a model's automatically a whore. Do people even read teh articles any more?

 

[distanted]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]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.[/citation]
I haven't seen the photo in question, so I'll take your word for it. I was going by the wording of the article which suggested the photos were racy. In any case, mixing a minor's photo with adult content would probably constitute child pornography. Sure she has a right to sue, but I think she shot herself in the foot by publicly making this an issue of not getting compensated rather than having her privacy and good name violated. The company in question will probably be forced to pay her a couple of grand and remove the photo, she'll be lucky to see $200 of that. If she hadn't said she's not embarassed, she probably could have gotten a lot more for mental anguish. Her lawyer probably did a face-palm when he read that Post interview. Going after Apple just sounds like a money grab.

It's a little ironic that on this site, where so many people justify file-sharing music and movies, that a 19 year old model not getting paid for her webcam photo invokes so much indignation.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]chick0n[/nom]She is just a whore, thats how I see it.[/citation]
Well, your a bucktooth hillbilly
That's how I see it
...
See? Easy to draw baseless assumptions isn't it?

 

[gto127]

She's suing Apple??? That's about like suing your landlord for someone breaking into your apartment.

 

[rooket]

wow that model doesn't even look that attractive. maybe it's all that clown makeup she's wearing.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]gto127[/nom]She's suing Apple??? That's about like suing your landlord for someone breaking into your apartment.[/citation]
Err, you can do that, if the landlord had inadequate locks, didn't change the locks from the previous tenant, or in this case bought stolen goods from the tenants apartment.
Good analogy, works fine for me.

 

[SASKEL]

The big question is how did those pictures get from her computer to the app developer? her lawsuit should be directed at the party that retrieved the images not the publisher. Maybe she's still in communications with that individual(s) which to me makes this a b.s lawsuit

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]SASKEL[/nom]The big question is how did those pictures get from her computer to the app developer? her lawsuit should be directed at the party that retrieved the images not the publisher. Maybe she's still in communications with that individual(s) which to me makes this a b.s lawsuit[/citation]
So you're telling that if some had stolen the source code of lets say Final Cut Pro and gave it to me, I would be able to publish it and be free of guilt just because I wasn't the one that stole it?
When launching any kind of application it is the duty of the developer to certify that everything is legally licensed.