Legal Question: Vanessa Hudgens' Nude Photos
 

I'm curious to know my rights in the following matter.

I have images of Vanessa Hudgens nude on a site of mine. Yesterday my server provider receives a DCMA notice. In summary they say I have to take them down or I'll be taken to court.

I live in Canada, I am hotlinking the images from a image host in the UK, and my server is in the USA. Neither Canada nor the UK have DCMA, I believe.

What can happen? Can legal action be taken against me? Can my server be shutdown?

Thanks

its better to go to court to prove that your innocent and besides your not the one who provide and upload that photo!

keep them up, they are surely public domain and no one can request that you follow any laws that do not even apply to your country

even linking to it, i know fleshbot had some sort of issue when they were only linking to the colin farel sex tape

Your server is in the USA. The hosting company could shut you down. You could be taken to court.

They (Disney) are going to spend a lot of money to keep these out of the public eye.

More like they are going to spend a lot of money to keep it in the headlines. Legal action always works, and builds a lot of hype for the model.

At this point in internet and entertainment history, if people still think all these leaked nudies are coincidence, the joke is on you.

why put yourself through a bunch of hostile bullshit? are you going to make $xxxx.xx. I would just drop the images and go onto something profitable. leave the grandstanding to someone else.

Fredisme: You actually have a bigger problem that you haven't faced yet: Without proof of the date of production, you have no way to know if the image is or isn't CP. Being in Canada, you need to know that publishing CP (even linking to another server) puts you at risk.

Drop it like a flaming pile of pooh. Run. Get rid of the image, and help them out by showing their where you are linking the image from, so they can go after them as well. Like bm bradley says, unless you are making an assload of money off of this, why the fuck would you even consider anything other than giving in right away?

there is no sexual content to the image. 2257 doesn't really apply

bm bradley, you need to rethink that and catch up with the new laws... nudity is MORE than enough now (you could be required to have 2257 for full clothed models under certain circumstances). The image is a sexual image of a completely nude teen showing off her tits and pussy for the camera. That needs a model release and proof of age.