Model Wins Lawsuit Against French Playboy For Publishing 'Unauthorized' Naked Photos

from the publicity-rights? dept

Erik sent over the the news that Dutch model Lara Stone has apparently won damages against French Playboy for publishing what were referred to as “unauthorized” photos of her in their June issue. Tragically, much of the reporting on this doesn’t explain what kind of photos we’re talking about (from the description, it almost sounded like photos taken while she was unaware). However, in the interest of understanding the legal implications only (of course), I (ahem) found the photos in question (oh so very NSFW). The photos all appear to be professional studio shots, most likely from a single photoshoot. Stone claims that her main complaint was just that “no woman wants photos of them to be published in Playboy without permission.” However, I’m wondering how French Playboy got the photos in the first place, and if it wouldn’t have a claim against the photographer, if he had claimed the rights to the photos (and produced a signed model release form). Obviously, the photos themselves were initially taken with permission, since it’s clearly a professional photoshoot. So, where in the process did the photos become “unauthorized”?

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: playboy

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Model Wins Lawsuit Against French Playboy For Publishing 'Unauthorized' Naked Photos”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Christopher (profile) says:

Re: Re:

I laughed when I saw your post.

On to the article itself. I am betting that she had a thing where on a CASE BY CASE BASIS, she had to give permission to use her photographs.

If the photographer included photos that the woman said “No, I don’t want those to be put in the magazine!” because they were too explicit or something similar?
THEN the photographer should be in trouble, not Playboy France.

wordsworm (profile) says:

America is a funny country.

It thought that it could show the world how great of a military it had by showing up France in Vietnam. We all know how that turned out. We also know that starting with Regan, Bin Laden got his arms and funding from the US government.

I don’t think it’s the nude photos that bother Lara Stone so much as where they were published. It’s too bad that the author didn’t do a bit more digging. Looking around myself, it would appear that the agency Icon ought to have borne most of the blame since they did not verify that the buyer was a tasteful publisher. In other words, she doesn’t want to be associated with porn. I can understand how she might be upset and how that could have a seriously negative impact on her career.

Lisae Boucher (profile) says:

She never posed for Playboy!

Actually, while Lara did pose nude for some photographer, the pictures were never meant to be used in Playboy magazine. She posed for the Pirelli calendar and several similar artistic photo collections but Playboy is a (softcore) porn magazine. And she doesn’t want to be associated with such magazines simply because it hurts her career in the modelling world.
These photo’s were made by Greg Lotus ( and were probably meant to be published in Vogue magazine. The pictures were made somewhen in november or december of 2009.
And apparently she can dictate the conditions of when and where they can be published.

Vigo says:

Re: She never posed for Playboy!

And she doesn’t want to be associated with such magazines simply because it hurts her career in the modelling world.

It doesn’t hurt her career as much as suing companies that want to use her photos. I don’t think anyone would want to deal with her now.

And apparently she can dictate the conditions of when and where they can be published.
That’s probably the core of her argument. I am guessing they told her the photos were solely for the calendar, but if the studio followed contract standards, then they probably had her sign away the rights to the photos.

Lisae Boucher (profile) says:

Re: Re: She never posed for Playboy!

Actually, it does harm her career, since some modelling agencies won’t want to hire models who’ve appeared nude in playboy magazine or similar magazines. The reputation of a model is very important in the modelling world. The playboy-article just destroyed her reputation as the “innocent girl next door” image, because Playboy is associated with erotics, not fashion.

JTchicago (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 She never posed for Playboy!

My guess is [as with most models] they demand a higher amount of pay to bear their bods. I am pretty sure she received a heafty sum for her 2009 and 2011 Pirelli Cals. But then look who took the shots for the 2011; Karl Lagerfeld; Head designer and creative director for the fashion house Chanel. Lagerfeld helms his own label fashion house, as well as the Italian house Fendi.

Do the Math…..

Joshy says:

Playboy has done this so many times over the years. This reminds me of the Jessica Alba lawsuit. She flat out refused and was the “Most gorgeous Women in America at the time So they went round and round trying to figure out how to get her or pictures of her from elsewhere she was upset because she didn’t want anything to do with or to promote PB and then one month she is suddenly on the cover.

This link doesn’t do justice to the full story. “

JTChicago (profile) says:

Greg Lotus is a pretty respected photographer and done some exceptional work. So this is somewhat baffling. French Playboy is more about ‘art’ and taste as opposed to US-PB which is more about low-brow, and appealing to the lowest common denominator. And as far as Lara Stone is concerned, why is she concerned? It is not like this appeared in Penthouse or Hustler. It makes no sense other then she was having a beef with Greg Lotus. In the final anaylsis, Lara makes millions and probably had other ideas for these pics like selling them to Max, Purple, or some other artsy magazine rather then Playboy-France. Since Lotus knows his stuff, I am fair certain he HAD a consent signed. It just proves that releases mean nothing and the model [will always] have final say on where her pics are published.

One thing is certain, Lotus will most likely not want to shoot her again, and Lara should marry a ‘baller’ and retire.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...