^

To clarify, I'm not completely opposed to her seeking legal action. Good for her if she thinks she can pull it off. But w/ her being in a bar w/ GGW filming, I just don't see how she could NOT know that her ta-tas could be exposed. She was a victim of her surroundings. For example, if you don't want to get shot, don't go to a bad part of town.

Did you even look at the pics? :spock: She's smirking. I'm sure she was trying to stay calm during the situation and play it off like it didn't bother her. However, if she was truly pissed, she would have had a different demeanor than what was portrayed in the pics.

The problem is you are going after the wrong person and so is she.. Was it as ggw employee?? It is not their fault it happened, they were filming.. She is not suing the guy that did it, she is suing ggw..

So if someone depants me at a bar or outside, some other random person videos it, uploads it to youtube and makes millions on the advertisement from clicks I can sue them??

And where did I say she deserved it?? Unless the person was a ggw employee, ggw did not anything wrong.. They were video taping live at a bar..

He is sticking to just one part of the story and not looking at all the other facts..

Just imagine all these lawsuits that can come out if this wins from youtube uploads from public places that embarrass people.. Remember do not sue the person who did it to you, sue the person who uploaded the picture/video to youtube or a dvd..

Maybe those guys that hit their buddy with a 2x4 and threw flour and water on him could sue Daniel Tosh for damaging his reputation..

:toast:So did it ever come up at the trial that she was engaged in underaged drinking and did the bar in question get fined for serving a minor? Just curious....

That should buy some nice beads

Holy crap! I didn't even notice that when I read the OP.

Good catch! :thumb:

Sure it was O'doulls.... Or she was holding for a friend tying her shoe...

If she isn't pissed about the incident itself then she has no reason to be pissed that it was put on the DVD.

Too late, she's already won the big bucks, the tall dollars, rolling in the dough, laughing all the way to the bank, living on easy street, shes made of money, rolling in the green, worth a bundle, well off, loaded, got it made, prosperous, in the money, she has the big kahunas, hit the payday, found the golden ticket, coming up roses, filthy rich, hit the goldmine, pelthora of riches, glutton of money, money over floweth, won the sweepstakes, hit the big score, and rich as king Midas do you need more descriptions?

LMAO No, sir. No need for more descriptions. I'm aware that she won. However, the company behind GGW is trying to overturn the verdict, so it sounds like the lawsuit is far from being over.

There is no situation you could laugh off in the moment, but would not want to be distributed internationally on DVD?

Also, to the people citing the sign as enough of a warning, I would see that sign and assume as long as I don't flash my (hypothetical) tits, they wouldn't end up on a DVD. I think that's a reasonable assumption. Maybe it wasn't the smartest place to drink, but that doesn't make it her fault.

I don't really see what the difference is in a bar full of random people seeing her tits and a bunch of random people seeing them on a DVD. Someone in the bar could've just as easily snapped a picture of them and posted them on the internet. Just seems odd that she is outraged about her tits being on a DVD and appears to have no issue with the fact that she was sexually assaulted.

Let's say that you're a woman and you go to a strip club w/ your husband. This isn't just any strip club either, we're talking full nudity. Before entering the establishment you notice a sign that states that females entering the club could be pulled on stage and stripped down.

Do you, (a) walk in and hope it doesn't happen, or (b) turn around and not chance having your reputation destroyed? I mean, hell, a co-worker or boss could be at that club. Awkwarddddd.

My point is, signs are posted for a reason. But, like I stated earlier, I do agree that GGW had no right to include her in the video because they didn't have her authorization to do so. If the verdict isn't overturned, then good for her. Perhaps she could use the money to get some color added to her areolas. :thumb: