If they did not want people to see them nude, then they should not have put them on in the first place.
I don’t have much sympathy for them.
It sounds like a publicity stunt.
Maybe they were the ones doing the hacking.
The hackers are the ones that need to be prosecuted.
Except for the “selfies,” the pictures are owned by whoever took the photos, not who is in them, regardless of whether they owned the phone/camera device or not. So unless Singer represents the boyfriends that took these pictures, these celebs have no standing in the court’s eyes.
The problem comes from the fact that these pictures were not only on the persons device, but they were backed up to a server (called the cloud nowadays). This is the default setting on iPhones as I understand it.
So there’s multiple responsibilities – Apple for setting their devices to auto-backup as default. The users for not understanding their devices and how they work. The server operators who didn’t have adequate security (not that there is such a thing in tech). And most importantly, the crackers (not hackers by the way) who broke in and stole the images.
Google, however, were only serving up links, so how they can be sued is baffling to me.
Lamest and most asinine argument ever, “If they did not want people to see them nude, then they should not have put them on in the first place.”
So then if I don’t want to be mugged, raped, or murdered, should I never leave my home? If I’m walking down the street and get attacked, am I “asking for it?”
I have diamond earrings, are you going to come steal them because they are there? And then tell me it was my fault for buying the diamond earrings (and subsequently wearing them) in the first place?
Why are you pardoning the criminals and blaming the victims?
When did it EVER become ok to invade someone’s privacy and steal?
I totally agree with you, whoever stole those photos should be prosecuted and it isnt the celebrities fault at all. However, I purposely dont take nude photos of myself due to the necessity to be cautious and I would think since these people have way more to lose than I, that they would be equally cautious. Everyone knows that anything posted on the internet anywhere can be stolen.
You are very much right about this. However, who in the heck takes naked pictures of themselves and then uploads them onto a cloud service?
For the less tech-savvy out there, assume that anything and everything you upload onto the internet is not private.
I am also amused by the fact that there are probably countless people who have had their data compromised and share on the internet. Nobody cares, nobody helps, nobody does a darn thing, simply because they aren’t famous celebrities. But a famous celebrity does something incredibly stupid and pays a predictable price for it? Goodness, that’s a $100,000,000 lawsuit, and the Feds will go to the ends of the earth to prosecute these people!
uh, no. The closest parallel would be “My car that I left running outside was stolen” The thief shares some responsibility, however the victim willingly placed their data in harms way.
I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to disagree. If Jennifer Lawrence had left an album of naked pictures of herself lying open on a park bench, then I would agree with your car running outside being stolen analogy. But, to go with your car analogy…
This wasn’t a car left running outside. If anything, the car was inside a garage that was supposed to be locked and have security. I agree that entrusting the safety of a Lamborghini* to an outside company** might not the smartest thing in the world. Especially when so many people would love to get their hands on one. But when you are supposed to be the only one with the key*** to that particular garage, I think it’s reasonable to believe that your car won’t be stolen and offered up to everyone to drive.
I’m thinking that in this scenario, the garage would definitely be Apple. But since Apple exists independently from Google, I don’t think Google would be the municipality. I think Google would be more like Craig’s List. It doesn’t have control of the car itself, but people can use it’s listings to search for, and get access to it.
Wow. I’ve just beaten that analogy into the ground, haven’t I? ;)
October 8, 2014 at 7:12 pm
Mom says says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Teach you children not to write or take photos that they don’t want the whole world to see.
I’d rather teach my daughter not to trespass and steal. Will I teach her modesty? of course!!! But, I can’t believe how many people are siding with the thieves on this. Because if you can’t have it both ways…if you say it’s the fault of the people who have the naked photos, then you are pardoning the thief.
Why aren’t they suing Apple?
If they did not want people to see them nude, then they should not have put them on in the first place.
I don’t have much sympathy for them.
It sounds like a publicity stunt.
Maybe they were the ones doing the hacking.
The hackers are the ones that need to be prosecuted.
Except for the “selfies,” the pictures are owned by whoever took the photos, not who is in them, regardless of whether they owned the phone/camera device or not. So unless Singer represents the boyfriends that took these pictures, these celebs have no standing in the court’s eyes.
The problem comes from the fact that these pictures were not only on the persons device, but they were backed up to a server (called the cloud nowadays). This is the default setting on iPhones as I understand it.
So there’s multiple responsibilities – Apple for setting their devices to auto-backup as default. The users for not understanding their devices and how they work. The server operators who didn’t have adequate security (not that there is such a thing in tech). And most importantly, the crackers (not hackers by the way) who broke in and stole the images.
Google, however, were only serving up links, so how they can be sued is baffling to me.
Lamest and most asinine argument ever, “If they did not want people to see them nude, then they should not have put them on in the first place.”
So then if I don’t want to be mugged, raped, or murdered, should I never leave my home? If I’m walking down the street and get attacked, am I “asking for it?”
I have diamond earrings, are you going to come steal them because they are there? And then tell me it was my fault for buying the diamond earrings (and subsequently wearing them) in the first place?
Why are you pardoning the criminals and blaming the victims?
When did it EVER become ok to invade someone’s privacy and steal?
I totally agree with you, whoever stole those photos should be prosecuted and it isnt the celebrities fault at all. However, I purposely dont take nude photos of myself due to the necessity to be cautious and I would think since these people have way more to lose than I, that they would be equally cautious. Everyone knows that anything posted on the internet anywhere can be stolen.
I purposely don’t take nude photos of myself due to the necessity to be cautious not to upset anyone’s stomach!
You are very much right about this. However, who in the heck takes naked pictures of themselves and then uploads them onto a cloud service?
For the less tech-savvy out there, assume that anything and everything you upload onto the internet is not private.
I am also amused by the fact that there are probably countless people who have had their data compromised and share on the internet. Nobody cares, nobody helps, nobody does a darn thing, simply because they aren’t famous celebrities. But a famous celebrity does something incredibly stupid and pays a predictable price for it? Goodness, that’s a $100,000,000 lawsuit, and the Feds will go to the ends of the earth to prosecute these people!
uh, no. The closest parallel would be “My car that I left running outside was stolen” The thief shares some responsibility, however the victim willingly placed their data in harms way.
I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to disagree. If Jennifer Lawrence had left an album of naked pictures of herself lying open on a park bench, then I would agree with your car running outside being stolen analogy. But, to go with your car analogy…
This wasn’t a car left running outside. If anything, the car was inside a garage that was supposed to be locked and have security. I agree that entrusting the safety of a Lamborghini* to an outside company** might not the smartest thing in the world. Especially when so many people would love to get their hands on one. But when you are supposed to be the only one with the key*** to that particular garage, I think it’s reasonable to believe that your car won’t be stolen and offered up to everyone to drive.
*naked pictures
**Apple’s cloud
***password
So then continuing this analogy, would Google be the municipality that allows that garage to be there and the garage itself be Apple?
I’m thinking that in this scenario, the garage would definitely be Apple. But since Apple exists independently from Google, I don’t think Google would be the municipality. I think Google would be more like Craig’s List. It doesn’t have control of the car itself, but people can use it’s listings to search for, and get access to it.
Wow. I’ve just beaten that analogy into the ground, haven’t I? ;)
Teach you children not to write or take photos that they don’t want the whole world to see.
I’d rather teach my daughter not to trespass and steal. Will I teach her modesty? of course!!! But, I can’t believe how many people are siding with the thieves on this. Because if you can’t have it both ways…if you say it’s the fault of the people who have the naked photos, then you are pardoning the thief.
Technology was made to make our living convenient but some people are enjoying by taking detriment of it