• Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

Urban Outfitters sued for risque underage images

Eeeeeh I don't know, those photos don't seem too bad. Maybe if it was my daughter I'd feel differently.
 
I'm sure we'd all feel differently if it was our daughter. But didnt they give these people permission to take the photos?
 
When I read "risque" I expected something else. Ahem... Well, anyway. I don't see the problem with those pictures.
 
Post some average aged risque pics for us to use as context for our judgment.
 
Sadly I've seen teens walking around more risque than that and no one was forcing it on them and they certainly weren't paid to either. It sounds like the parents are looking to cash in on this.
 
Suing for 28 million?! Give me a break... It's not like the girl is nude, or even partially so
 
How are these risque? Are the parents the kind of parents who think Harry Potter is the devil because it promotes witchcraft?
 
That girl does not look 15. Satan's greatest achievement is jailbait.
 
Nothing risque about the pics. Unless a girl having legs is considered risque???

I'd say it's more an example of how sick people think when they see these pics and think of SEX right away, maybe they parents should sue their own dirty minds. I sure as hell didn't think of anything risque or dirty when i saw them.
 
She is holding a six pack. Technically, the parents are just *******s. It's not like they didn't see the pics beforehand.
 
Most kids dress/look like this on a hot summers day. Maybe we can sue those kids too.
 
the article said there were more risque pics not shown, one that focuses on her crotch and one wearing an open jacket with nothing underneath
 
That girl isn't sexy at all. She's way too skinny. And this is coming from a 16 year old.
 
hahahaha

Why are all the 15 year old's the sexiest!?!?!?!?!?!?:cmad:
Why don't you ask Google this, and when the FBI kick down your door, you can double check with them. :up:
 
Can we file this #under rich white hipster kid problems?
 
Suing is excessive...but the photo was obviously of very poor taste.
 
Just sit back kiddies and I'll tell you an interesting story this guy told me when I was working the Day Shift at the Laundromat I'm employed at. Trust me it has something vaguely connected to this subject. Anyways, this guy used to be a janitor at a local High School and he was telling me of the time he accidentally entered the Girls' Locker room and saw the entire girl's swim team showering naked. He said he thought he'd died and gone to heaven. Now me on the other hand, I told him that's kind of creepy that he just stood there looking at them without feeling any embarrassment whatsoever. Some of the images aren't bad, but there are a few like the girl in the torn shirt wearing the helmet staring seductively at the camera that makes me think about that guy and his jailbait perversion.
 
Frivolous lawsuits are frivolous.

As far as that janitor...

Was the swim team all seniors? 17 and 18? If so... hard to dub that perversion. Creepy, sure. Especially to just stand there. But show me one man alive who wouldn't at least have spent a good 10 seconds or so looking...

Now if that swim team is freshmen... ok, you've got a lot more legitimate case for 'perversion' there.
 
Frivolous lawsuits are frivolous.

As far as that janitor...

Was the swim team all seniors? 17 and 18? If so... hard to dub that perversion. Creepy, sure. Especially to just stand there. But show me one man alive who wouldn't at least have spent a good 10 seconds or so looking...

Now if that swim team is freshmen... ok, you've got a lot more legitimate case for 'perversion' there.

Here's my rule: I never think anyone who is still High School Age attractive or sexy. I am 38 going on 39 and someone who is young enough to be my son is a very big turn off! The youngest I will go is a guy in their mid to late 20's. Just to give you an example I had this 17 year old kid flirt with me and he was quite sexually explicit with his words, all that was going through my head was that this kid was two years older than one of my nephews. That really creeps me out because as a 17 year old he has neither had his hormone levels drop nor has he lived life and learned the lessons he needs to learn yet.

Now if Tom Hiddleston was hitting on me, that's a different story. :hrt:
 
these parents are crazy, they have probably bought their daughter more risque pictures than that and she probably has them up on her facebook account anyway.

doomed to fail....

parents can't have it all ways, teenage models are more likely to represent adults than their youthful counterparts in their teens. THey shouldnt be naiive to the process and if they were that concerned they should have been on the site when they were being taken and had asked for them to be destroyed (or not taken in the first place).

had he said he had destroyed them and not, that would be another story but i get the impression they had been signed off.

meh, people have too much time on their hands
 
If it's true that the photo has been used without the parents' permission, I guess, their action was just right. By the way, the trendy store "Urban Outfitters" is getting flack for the obscene language contained in its present holiday catalog. Some say the practice is objectionable, while others say it is just good marketing. Take a review at this website.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"