Aniston Warns Over Topless Photos

The Smoking Gun - via Drudge ^ | December 2005

[new cruelty]

DECEMBER 5--Lawyers for Jennifer Aniston have warned publications that they will face an invasion of privacy lawsuit if they print topless photos of the actress taken recently while she was apparently sunbathing at her Los Angeles home. In a blistering letter sent to celebrity magazines, attorney John Lavely wrote that the publication of photographs "showing [Aniston] topless or in the act of taking off or putting on her top" would expose those titles to "substantial monetary damages." In his letter, Lavely wrote that the topless photos were taken by paparazzo Peter Brandt, who allegedly used a "powerful telephoto lens" from a perch more than a mile away from Aniston's home. Below you'll find a copy of the Lavely letter, which includes a few redactions requested by TSG's source. Lavely, of the powerhouse L.A. litigation firm Lavely & Singer, noted that Aniston has just filed a lawsuit against Brandt in Los Angeles Superior Court and that the star's London lawyers had obtained a restraining order barring publication of the topless photos in the U.K. (3 pages)

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

Who cares?

[Fierce Allegiance]

Ping to "the guys".

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Now you've done it.

[Fierce Allegiance]

Who cares?

Potential boobage? I am sure a lot of people care!

[West Coast Conservative]

They'll make their way onto the internet somehow.

[Izzy Dunne]

HINT: That GQ picture was NOT taken from a mile away, or I will eat her shorts.

[Constitution Day]

Count me in.

[Wiseghy]

Can hardly blame her. Them PP types have become institutionalized scum, often with decent sized companies with lawyers behind them now.

[martin_fierro]

Outstanding Flair there.

[injin]

bone rack....

[Izzy Dunne]

I meant MY HAT, of course. I will eat my hat. Sure. That's it.

[Constitution Day]

Heh.

[Al Gator]

Pictures?

This is Free Republic, we do nothing with gratuitous pictures!

[TommyDale]

Someone is trying to make mountains out of mole hills. She posed in a topless, seductive picture for GQ, but other pictures are an invasion of privacy? Get real! She opened the door, now she will probably be exposed to the public (pun intended).

[sarasota]

Yeah. Big deal. She isn't going to be paid for those topless photos some guy took, unlike GQ which paid her what? Celebs can't stand it when they don't get their take. It's about the money, not the topless pics.

[AmericanArchConservative]

They forgot to pay her the customary fee for such exposure...

[Red Badger]

Would it make a difference?......

[Fierce Allegiance]

Two pieces is the minimum.

[martin_fierro]