Paris Hilton

[decadence]

From rest of article originally posted in link by mu_agd: The suit alleges that towards the end of the full-length 27-minute video, Hilton takes the camera to the bathroom with her to film in a brighter setting, explaining to Solomon that she wants anyone who views the tape to see her breasts in better light, as opposed to the dimly lit bedroom.

Not camera shy!

The tape was shot three years ago, when Solomon was 30 (!!) and Hilton was 19. The duo reportedly watched it together after it was shot, then Solomon showed it to several friends, allegedly with Hilton's full permission.

[valkyrie]

Originally posted by AXJules
Ok, did anyone ever play Oregon Trail as a kid?? Because that's what she looks like- this disturbing bunny/deer/wilderness animal scampering in front of the camera for a sec and jumping on the bed.

My rating:
GHEY.

Holy shit that is the funniest thing I've ever heard in my life. Where do you come up with this stuff?!

[SparkliiQTMTSU]

The tape was hilarious! geez I wonder what other stupid stuff she did durring the whole taping. actually answered her cell maybe or chatted with the camera some more. what a moron to say she was unaware of the taping. Shes probably the one that let it slip anyways. wonder how long before the whole thing is out. I mean how can a 3 min clip get out and not the whole thing not that I understand any of this internet mumbojumbo lol

Nichole

[absolutuscchick]

Ok the tape was pretty amusing but really she grossed me out. She's so freaking skinny and bony! I mean like she could use to gain like twenty pounds and then she might actually be attractive....MIGHT...

[The1calledTKE]

Paris strikes again this time probably was an accident...

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2004112118,00.html

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by The1calledTKE
Paris strikes again this time probably was an accident...

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2004112118,00.html

Who does she think she is? Janet Jackson?

[James]

As long as she is good looking all is forgiven.

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by James
As long as she is good looking all is forgiven.

She looks forgiven.

[KillarneyRose]

I can't understand all the fuss over a nipple. I mean, c'mon, most of us have them!

As for Paris, it's not even an entire nipple - only half it was peeking out.

Otherwise, she look great in the picture. Poor Nick Carter, though, looks kinda bloated and haggard.

[G8Ralphaxi]

ummm...for those of you thinking you can have the video because no one registered a copyright for it, you're wrong.

without going too deeply into a complicated legal discussion (because i am realistic and know none of you really cares ) the current version of US copyright law allows the copyright protections to attach automatically when the work is created.

only certain types of works qualify, they need to be "original" and in some some type of "fixed medium" - i.e. a written document, a tape recording, a photo, etc. This video definitely is "original" enough to qualify. (I probably can't copyright a blank piece of white paper or the alphabet typed in 12 point times new roman, it's not original enough).

OK, so the video is original. It's automatically entitled to copyright protection by the "author" - whoever directed the video or controlled its direction (here, either Rick or Paris), or whoever now owns the copyright (if it was sold). The only thing that registration does that's relevant here is gives the US govt an official record of your "work" so they know what you're trying to protect. (There are other issues relevant to burdens of proof required if you pursue litigation, but I'm not going to discuss it here.)

Owning a "copyright" means what it sounds like - you have a "right to copy" the work and prevent others from copying. There are some exceptions, like parodies and what's called "fair use," which allows limited use of copyrighted works for certain purposes that society feels are beneficial (i.e. educational and charitable purposes). Whether or not the alleged copyright infringer is selling the product or otherwise commercially benefitting is not really relevant in determining if they violated the copyright (it does affect damages, i.e., how BAD was this conduct?)

So if Rick or maybe Paris decides to assert their copyright in the video, they could theoretically sue every website hosting the video and everyone downloading it (if they could find them). It's similar to the Napster lawsuit and the latest RIAA suits against KaZaa users.

[damasa]

Originally posted by G8Ralphaxi
ummm...for those of you thinking you can have the video because no one registered a copyright for it, you're wrong.

Honestly, I don't think it matters to most people.

It's like the whole file sharing craze. So the RIAA is taking up suit against a few people in hopes that they will stop illegal downloading of music - it won't happen.

If they can't use Kazaa they'll use something else and if they can't use something else then they'll use something besides that.

I don't think the word "copyright" has much of an impact on most people. And as for said video, copyright or not, if people want it they are going to get it and they'll obtain and hold it illegally if it's that important.

[norcalchick]

I swear they have some very odd outfits, and if anyone else on the streets wore what they wear, people would look at them like they were crazy and would think "what in the hell are those girls wearing?!" The Hiltons can pull it off cause they're thin as rails and famous, but you still look at what they wear sometimes and just wonder....

[smiley21]

their goal is to not wear what everyone else is wearing