“A woman sued Amazon.com on Friday, accusing it of selling a book of photographs of half-naked underaged girls, including a cover picture of herself at age 10… Almeida was living in Sao Paulo, Brazil, in 1991 when her mother agreed to let a local fashion photographer take her picture for a series of artistic photos of young girls, entitled ‘18 Girls Under 18.’ Her mother signed a release allowing the photo to be published in a limited release to be sold only on the opening night of the art gallery. Instead, the picture was published inside a book called ‘Forbidden Angels.’ About 200 copies were sold at the opening and the rest were sized by police as child pornography. The photographer and his publisher were acquitted of child porn charges in 1993 in a high-profile case… In 2002, Almeida learned that another edition of the book was published with Almeida’s picture on the cover and a purported endorsement from the then-10-year-old and statements from her parents.” — Sarasota Herald Tribune (US)

Shoot the messenger, anybody? If a book is legal to publish, then a distributor breaks no law by selling it. Amazon is in no way liable for the content of the books it sells. What’s more, the plaintiff’s mother signed a release when the photo was taken — and then the photographer himself was acquitted of child pornography charges. It’s pretty clear what’s going on here, isn’t it? Since the woman obviously couldn’t win a lawsuit against the photographer, she’s going after Amazon — who, to top matters off, had already removed the book from its online store before the woman even filed the suit!

Isn’t it clear what’s going on? This is an absolutely spurious lawsuit by yet another person trying to capitalize financially on her “victimization.” She should be more ashamed of her greed than her naked body.

VideoBox

It's like the iTunes Music Store for Porn. Download unlimited high-quality video for only $9.95/month.