Erin Andrews Trying To Takedown Nude Images Using Copyright She 'Bought'
from the handing-over-the-copyright dept
Someone who prefers to remain anonymous sent over the news that famed ESPN sports commentator Erin Andrews' lawyers have threatened the website TheDirty.com for posting still images from the surreptitiously shot video of Andrews naked in her hotel room. As you may recall, last year, a video that was secretly filmed of Andrews via some sort of spy camera made it to the internet. As we noted at the time, while it was incredibly illegal to create the video, it's almost certainly not illegal to watch it -- though, it does make you kind of a creep and a jerk. But... is it illegal to show the video... or still images from the video? There's probably a publicity rights claim that Andrews could use to stop such things, but in the latest threat (which TMZ got its hands on), Andrews' lawyer appears to be threatening a copyright claim, stating (among other things), "the copyright of these images belong exclusively to Ms. Andrews."That seemed a bit odd, and the submitter suggested this was a misuse of a copyright claim. As horrible as the video is, the copyright would belong to the miscreant creep who took the video -- who's now serving 30 months in jail. But, since the guy was caught, tried and sentenced to jail... it made me wonder if maybe, somehow, as a part of that, Andrews was given the copyright. And... indeed, according to one report when the guy was sentenced, it's stated that "she paid Barrett a nominal fee to gain copyright ownership of her nude videos," and it notes (as has happened) that she planned to use the copyright to try to pull the videos and images offline. Of course, apparently the site in question didn't give in and simply reposted the images after they got the threat letter, so the next question is whether or not she'll actually sue the site.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, erin andrews, takedowns
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Awesome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Awesome.
Wait, revise that: more cunning woman... Paris Hilton pulled it off her intellect is questionable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Awesome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
She was a victim of a crime, I can totally understand wanting to squelch all instances of the result of that crime where she can. Were it you, or your wife, or your kids that had been victimized in this way, I'd imagine you'd feel the same.
It's interesting/disturbing that she'd have to purchase the rights to the product of a criminal act, however. Aren't there laws against criminals being able to profit from the crimes for which they've been convicted?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Yes, she's the victim of a crime and, yes, if it were my daughter or partner I'd be furious but there does come a time where one needs to understand that once these things are out there on the Internet, they're out there.
The site in question's morality is also in serious question but that doesn't make it wise to send threatening letters or head off to court where it all gets washed over again in public.
Hence, the striesand effect.
There are so many "celebrity" nudes out there that no one really cares any more. I certainly didn't and won't waste my time googling for her just to see the silly things.
(I can create much better, sexier ones in programs like Poser, actually.)
It's really long past time she dropped it and waited for it to go on the scrap pile it belongs on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
But she could go after any distributors of the video, since it's product and evidence of a crime, and use copyright law to her advantage. Especially if it's turning a buck for a site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're right she could go after the distributors of the video and pictures if anyone is actually sending out DVD or CD copies. It just strikes me as a massive waste of time and her money given that they're very unlikely to pay any judgment against them. Then pop up on a server in the Seychelles, for example.
For now, though, this is a (probably) well intentioned move gone badly wrong as these sorts of things too often do.
Then again, it could be for the publicity as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I can't call her a 'celebrity nude'. She's a crime victim. If she wants to bash for cash on these sites, I won't say I don't wish her luck. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ya wasting time is right
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yes sue and win
The images will still be somewhere on the internet, but harder to find.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
welcome to the streisand effect lady. (of course, its completely plausible that getting her name back out in the public was the intended effect to begin with).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: mmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not completely useless
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not completely useless
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not completely useless
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wireless cameras
Clock with hidden IP wireless camera
Apparently it looks like like a normal clock, but the device hides an IP camera perfect to record images in hiding mode. The registered images and sounds can be transmitted to a listener outside, connecting the clock to a computer via WiFi. The recording settings may be modified throught Internet.
Additionally, to view the images remotely, the IP-WATCH uses an integrated DVR capable to save audio/video clips on SD card.
Main characteristics of our IP Watch:
Clock with hidden camera and WiFi IP
Integrated video recorder
High-resolution camera
Controllable from anywhere through the Internet
Audio/Video communication via Wi-Fi
Algorithmic compression H. 264
Double alarm
http://www.endoacustica.com/wireless-video-recording-kit.htm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]