I'm reading in this weeks Entertainment Weekly about Marcia Cross threw out some nude photos of herself and this dumpster diver has them now and may publish them. She says they are copyrighted....
but isn't it her fault for not cutting them up first before throwing them out?
2006-11-03 06:41:23 · 5 answers · asked by ♥Brown Eyed Girl ♥ 5 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Celebrities
Absolutely it is her fault she should have destroyed those pictures. She probabley wanted them to be found. I mean come on, throwing out nude pictures on one's self and not destroying them. she is a celebrity, naturally people out there go through celebritie's trash to see what they can keep as a token. What an idiot she is for not doing that. It's her own fault and she now will have to deal with the consequences for not doing so.
2006-11-03 06:50:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they were just Polaroids they are not copyrighted. even if they're photos on professional paper but do not have the name of the photographer(s) on the paper then they're still not copyrighted and even if they are copyrighted with the name(s) of the photographer(s) then the photographer(s) have to sue the person
In short: If you take pictures and throw them away and they get republished it's your fault. Now she may be able to sue them for something but I doubt it.
2006-11-03 14:50:39 · answer #2 · answered by princessdez122008 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it sounds like baloney...... You cant believe whacha read all the time. Why would anyone in her position be so dumb......... I dont believe alot of that stuff. but if she is that ignorant and has naked photos and did not destroy them .... it is her fault. for being so stupid.... See money doesnt not bring a person common sense.
2006-11-03 14:58:00 · answer #3 · answered by zachs mom 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are very right. If I were her I would have burned or shredded them.
2006-11-03 14:50:38 · answer #4 · answered by Demon Doll 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Duh!
2006-11-03 14:57:40 · answer #5 · answered by 4 strings 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋