Reuters reports that Paris Hilton, the hotel heiress and reality TV star, is suing a Panama-based internet company in the Los Angeles Superior Court. The claim arises out of the worldwide circulation of a video of Ms Hilton having sex with her then-boyfriend that has been forwarded to millions of random personal email inboxes. Maintaining that the video was meant for her personal viewing only, she is claiming $15million actual damages and the same amount in punitive damages for violation of privacy, illegal business practices and infliction of emotional distress.
The IPKat says that the genie is out of the bottle. There’s precious little Ms Hilton can do to claw back her privacy. Prevention is the best cure in such situations – if you are going to make videos of yourself doing naughty things, make sure that you don’t entrust them to people who are going to leak them.
Paris Hilton here
Sleep with Paris Hilton here
Is the video all that it seems? Find out here (no – this isn’t a link to the tape – you should be ashamed of yourself!) Sociology of the tape here
The IPKat says that the genie is out of the bottle. There’s precious little Ms Hilton can do to claw back her privacy. Prevention is the best cure in such situations – if you are going to make videos of yourself doing naughty things, make sure that you don’t entrust them to people who are going to leak them.
Paris Hilton here
Sleep with Paris Hilton here
Is the video all that it seems? Find out here (no – this isn’t a link to the tape – you should be ashamed of yourself!) Sociology of the tape here
I LOVE PARIS IN THE SPRINGTIME
![I LOVE PARIS IN THE SPRINGTIME]()
Reviewed by Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo
on
Sunday, February 08, 2004
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html