Streisand files $50 million lawsuit over aerial photos

AP ^ | Thursday, May 29, 2003 | BRUCE HARING

[friendly]

Barbra Streisand is suing an aerial photographer and his associates for $50 million, claiming pictures they provide to others of her Malibu home and property violates her right to privacy.

Photographer Kenneth Adelman, 39, of Watsonville; his Web hosting service, Level 42; and Pictopia, a photo agency that disseminates his work, were named in the suit. It was filed May 20 in Los Angeles Superior Court and alleges five counts of privacy intrusion, including violation of the state's anti-paparazzi act.

[friendly]

Does some one have a recent unretouched photo of Citizen Streisand? Scary stuff from a mega-mega hypocrite.

[friendly]

And from the website of California Coastal Records Project Web site, www.californiacoastline.org.

Barbra Streisand Sues to Suppress Free Speach Protection for Widely Acclaimed Website

Barbra Streisand, known for espousing pro-environmental views and criticizing those who don't, has sued the California Coastal Records Project, a landmark photographic database of over 12,000 frames of the California coast shot since 2002, asserting that the inclusion of a single frame that includes her blufftop Malibu estate invades her privacy, violates the "anti-paparazzi" statute, seeks to profit from her name, and threatens her security. Other defendants in the case are the Project's Internet Service Provider, Layer42.NET, and Pictopia.COM, who provides finished prints of the photographs.

[dighton]

Sorry, Barb. No one in his right mind wants to see you (or your property) with your (or its) clothes off.

Try filing in Belgium.

[footstomper]

Aw come on. Does any one want an unretouched photo of Babsy babe??? There are just some things one can do without.

[friendly]

I just saw her mug, unretouched, on the cover of tabloid while waiting on the supermarket checkout last evening. It is terrifying enough to give grown men hives and make cats defecate.

[ChadGore]

Streisand files $50 million lawsuit over aerial photos because, dispite the plane being at 15,000 feet, they couldn't get all of her in the frame.

[ChadGore]

Aren't limo libs funny ?

[DoughtyOne]

And this little piggie squealed all the way home...

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

"...peeeoplllllle... people who sue peeeeeoplllllllle..."

[DoughtyOne]

Streisand's Breakdown,
perhaps they're already covering
this story LOL.

[friendly]

That's it! That what gave me "agita" on th echeckout line!

[friendly]

That's it! That what gave me "agita" on the checkout line!

[sheik yerbouty]

BS is having another "out of mind experience."

[friendly]

BS will have a tough time in court opposing an extremely popular not-for-profit website. This will cost the little website dearly, in legal costs (the real issue here).

BS is such a vile POS.

[DoughtyOne]

The suit asks that the defendants stop disseminating the photographs, which use "enhanced technology" and deprive Streisand "of the economic value of the use of the images of her property and residence."

It's nice to know this was all about safety issues.  LOL

This woman has had access to money and privilege beyond what 99.99% of the populace has had.  Still it isn't enough.  Don't tell me this isn't about money.  If it wasn't the above statement wouldn't have been made.

Babst is a leftist's leftist.  As such she promotes environmentalism.  But when push comes to shove, she can't even allow her property to be photographed as part of an overall project that sees all coastal properties photographed for scientific purposes.

Streisand is one of the most revolting two-faced people on the face of the planet.

[friendly]

Babst is a leftist's leftist. As such she promotes environmentalism. But when push comes to shove, she can't even allow her property to be photographed as part of an overall project that sees all coastal properties photographed for scientific purposes. Streisand is one of the most revolting two-faced people on the face of the planet.

You just unnecessarily insulted all the decent revolting two-faced people on the face of the planet, by comparing them with the despicable Barbra and her cadre of lawyer cockroaches.

[DoughtyOne]

Ah yes, but you just insulted decent cockroaches everywhere, so we're even.

[friendly]

LOL, even steven

[tdadams]

Well, if she was aiming to mitigate the harm this website is allegedly causing her, Ms. Streisand's lawsuit is likely to do just the opposite.

Thanks to all the media attention, and the resulting widespread publication of the website address in question, she just propelled an obscure website that probably saw little traffic from the general public into a site that's probably going to be in the top 10 in this week's hit counts.

[BlueLancer]

"...even steven..."

Isn't that a sexist statement?
8')

[friendly]

LOL

[Tijeras_Slim]

Hey! I don't see a clothesline in that photo! I thought BS wanted us all to conserve energy. What gives?

[Mamzelle]

This might actually be an interesting case. It involves personal intellectual property. It has always both annoyed and alarmed me that all manner of entities keep "dossiers" on us as individuals, without expressed permission. Doesn't that info belong, first and only, to us as individuals? We all know women who, shortly after they find they are pregnant, suddenly start receiving diaper advertisements in the mail. Spooky. Some computer, somewhere, has huge files on us.

This info is retrievable as evidence in court, BTW. If you are party in a lawsuit, your opponents can head down to the local merchant (where you have one of those discount cards you keep on your keychain) and subpoena all your buying habits. Sometimes this turns up interesting and embarrassing things...

[friendly]

Yeah and what about the 8 car garage? I am sure it is filled with bicycles.

And where are all the solar panels? I imagine this monstrosity of a hopuse uses astonishing amounts of oil and electricity.

[friendly]

I am sure the Smoking Gun will keep us informed of the court filings.

[Tijeras_Slim]

House? I thought it was a sanitarium.

[DoughtyOne]

Hey good call. I'd mention this but it would probably result in an effort for her to seek compensation for mental cruelty.

[Tijeras_Slim]

Let her sue me. Everything I have wouldn't pay for her pool filter cleaning.

[DoughtyOne]

: )

[xp38]

The Photo she objects to from the website you linked to.

N34 00.65 W118 47.24 Image 3850 Mon Sep 23 13:40:04 2002 Streisand Estate, Malibu

[pointsal]

Maybe she should contact the county assessor....never can tell what's on the tax roll.......

[DoughtyOne]

I'm afraid I didn't understand your point. But then I am tired.

[TC Rider]

And what has all her crying accomplished? Her house pictured all over the internet..

Try link here if picture doesn't show.

[finnman69]

Cmon Barbra, unless your house was built illegally there will be plans of it and the grounds on file with the local building department. You can pay to retrieve those records.

[TC Rider]

Second Try..

[finnman69]

That looks like a Winnebago in her parking lot along with at least 3 other vehicles. How much gas do they use and how much pollution do they create BAR-BRA!

[smith288]

50 million? What on Earth did this person violate that constitutes 50 million? Oh...she is a liberal..nevermind.

[smith288]

Plenty of chimneys to pollute too!

[ArrogantBustard]

Fascinating... Those houses are awfully close to the edge of what looks like a sand cliff. Good thing they don't have hurricanes in Cali. A good storm or two (of the sort we endure in the East) would have them in the drink.

[xp38]

Also from the website....

Since shortly after our web site "went live", Barbra Streisand has been complaining about a photograph on our web site, 3% of which covers her home. In February 2003, we received a threatening letter from her attorney, John Gatti of Alschuler Grossman Stein & Kahan LLP, demanding that we "immediately cease and desist from photographing and displaying and identifying photographs of Ms. Streisand's home on the website www.californiacoastline.org [...]".

We refuse to be intimidated by these tactics, which would undermine our constitutional protection of free speech and which would compromise the integrity of this historical and scientific database. As a result of which, we received a second threatening letter.

Our goal is to create a complete record of the California coastline. This record has been used by a number of government, university, press, and environmental groups (partial list) free of charge. It is not possible to provide the public with a complete record without the photographs of the coast that happen to include Ms. Streisand's estate. We do not believe in giving special treatment to wealthy coastal land owners.

Ms. Streisand, who proports to espouse the First Amendment right of freedom of speech (See "My Thoughts On Freedom of Speech" (scroll down to "My Thoughts"), at www.barbrastreisand.com) apparently feels differently when the publication of a photograph shows her backyard.

Here is a copy of the Complaint that Ms. Streisand filed against us in Superior Court in Los Angeles. All of her claims are frivolous and will be vigorously defended.

[pointsal]

Hey, are sure that's the right house?
Compare it to photo 3850.

[gridlock]

That can't be her house. I don't see any clotheslines in the yard. Surely she is not using (gasp!) an electric clothes dryer!

[xp38]

Laundry? I once had a cleaning lady who told me that some of the very rich wear things only once and toss them.

[TC Rider]

Laundry? I once had a cleaning lady who told me that some of the very rich wear things only once and toss them.

We know Hillary used to take a deduction on her taxes for donating Bill's used underwear to Goodwill.

Ewwwwww!

[Michael.SF.]

demanding that we "immediately cease and desist from photographing and displaying and identifying photographs of Ms. Streisand's home on the website.

OK, I have read all comments above and am going to have to say that BS has a valid point. Consider the following:

1. What purpose is served by specifically identifying her home on the website? All the purported reasons for the research can be accomplished w/o specifically identifying the property as hers. I wonder how many other homes are identified by owner?

2. There are lots of kooks out there (BS is one of them). Someone could gain information from the website, which could then be used to assist that person in causing her harm.

3. Her lawyers did ask them to cease and desist. They could easily have stopped identifying her house w/o losing any free speech rights.

50 million? Yes, ridiculous. The fact that it is an environmental activist website, yes she is a hypocrite.

But there is some validity in her complaint.

[Pyro7480]

Babz better watch out for the next California earthquake. It could cause a landslide, and it will take the house with it, along with anyone inside.

[Michael.SF.]

We know Hillary used to take a deduction on her taxes for donating Bill's used underwear to Goodwill.

With or without skid marks?

[xp38]

I agree but it's fun to see liberals attacking each other. If you can read the filed complaint with an adobe reader there's loads of unintentional laughs. She's upset the location of the parasols around her pool are revealed among other things.

[Michael.SF.]

She's upset the location of the parasols around her pool are revealed among other things.

LOL. Well, I did say that BS is one of the "kooks."

That is too funny. I will try to take a look at it later. Thanks.

[friendly]

Look carefully at Post #35: Streisand's corrupt complex is an environmental nightmare.

How in God's Name did the California Coastal Commission and the local zoning commission ever approve this colossal ugly monstrosity??? Were there bribes to get the obvious extreme variances needed to build this FuhrerBunker?? It is a desecration of the beautiful Coast.

And where does the presumably endless supply of sewage from Babs drain into?? Obviously it drains into the ocean.

Gosh if I didn't know better, I would swear Babs is a massive liar and complete environmental hypocrite when she curses out Bush and the Pubbies' environmental policies.