Jennifer Lawrence's comments regarding nude photos

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The victim blaming on here is astounding and disgusting, and yet one more example of a culture that seeks to shame women for being sexual beings, while at the same time feeling entitled to their bodies at all times.

- She doesn't need to apologize or explain why she took nude photos.
- The fact she took nudes for someone else doesn't entitle you to view them. Knowing that they were stolen, if you CHOOSE to seek them out, you are complicit.
- She doesn't need to justify not being super tech savvy or unable to keep them out of the cloud. Or perhaps they were hacked from her phone or computer. It doesn't matter. They were stolen.
- By the logic presented here, anyone who utilizes online banking or any form of online credit transaction deserves to have their account information stolen, disseminates, and repeatedly reposted. It is your fault if you are victimized and you should no better.

Women have a right to their own sexualiity. They have a right to choose when and with whom they want to share it.

Fuck all you shamers and apologists. Seriously. Fuck you.

Right on. I think there are a few pervs on this thread who did indeed look at the stolen nudes and don't like being told they are gross human beings.

I don't like women not being responsible for their own decisions. Im a woman and thats how I see it.
You are stupid if you don't know by now that material on phones and in clouds can be hacked. She has responsibility for her actions in this matter, the Apple service agreement even warns about it.

So by your logic a woman who wears some sexy underwear or goes commando because it turns her on or she's doing it for her lover who gets upskirted is guilty because there has been lots of publicity about creeps who take upskirt pictures and post them on the net.

And a woman who gets on a crowded subway and gets groped is responsible because we all know that happens on subways and she put herself in a position where it could happen.

And a woman who walks past a construction site is responsible for the catcalls she receives because we all know about the stereotype of construction workers who do that.

Etc., etc.

Where on that slippery slope would you propose that we stop and accept that the woman is not at fault?

Who said anything about fault. I believe it was about accepting responsibility for being careless.
Seeing a nude of a person is not the same as sexual assault. As I womn who has been rapped I find your assertion disturbing.

Sounds like you were pretty careless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The victim blaming on here is astounding and disgusting, and yet one more example of a culture that seeks to shame women for being sexual beings, while at the same time feeling entitled to their bodies at all times.

- She doesn't need to apologize or explain why she took nude photos.
- The fact she took nudes for someone else doesn't entitle you to view them. Knowing that they were stolen, if you CHOOSE to seek them out, you are complicit.
- She doesn't need to justify not being super tech savvy or unable to keep them out of the cloud. Or perhaps they were hacked from her phone or computer. It doesn't matter. They were stolen.
- By the logic presented here, anyone who utilizes online banking or any form of online credit transaction deserves to have their account information stolen, disseminates, and repeatedly reposted. It is your fault if you are victimized and you should no better.

Women have a right to their own sexualiity. They have a right to choose when and with whom they want to share it.

Fuck all you shamers and apologists. Seriously. Fuck you.

Right on. I think there are a few pervs on this thread who did indeed look at the stolen nudes and don't like being told they are gross human beings.

I don't like women not being responsible for their own decisions. Im a woman and thats how I see it.
You are stupid if you don't know by now that material on phones and in clouds can be hacked. She has responsibility for her actions in this matter, the Apple service agreement even warns about it.

You are not holding women responsible for their own decisions. You are holding them responsible for the illegal and immoral actions of other people. Without some nasty asshole douchebag deciding to steal those pics, those pics stay private, as they should've, regardless of where she kept them, as long as she didn't publicly display them.

Thats right, I do not police others moral values. I do not see any expectation of privacy within the cloud service. Wanting privacy just doesn't make it so.

Really? Because you seem to have no problem calling these women "stupid."

And even today, Apple bills iCloud as secure. In fact, it states "Apple takes data security and the privacy of your personal information very seriously. iCloud is built with industry-standard security practices and employs strict policies to protect your data." It is completely reasonable to expect that her pics would remain private.

Your arguments are completely hypocritical and illogical. You claim that these women were dumb for expecting privacy in iCloud, but see no problem expecting your money to be private in an online banking account, which makes the same representations regarding privacy as iCloud does. You claim that the women are stupid and deserve what happened to them, but won't police the moral values of those who stole their private information and people who took advantage of that theft to gawk at their naked bodies without their consent. You claim to be above such foolish decisions because you take the security of your online data seriously, and then store it in a personal cloud that is significantly less secure.

Do yourself a favor. Sit down and really think about why you are holding these positions and what they say about how you view women and their sexuality.

So, you think it is criminal to share private conversations like the ones between Donald Sterling and his girlfriend?

Do yourself a favor. Sit down and really think about why you are holding these positions. You can't have it both ways.

Yeah, I do, actually. That was gross.

But it's incredibly telling that you would equate "being a disgusting racist fool" with "sharing sexual images of yourself within a private, consensual relationship."

Seriously. Reread your posts.

Seriously study law. You do not understand privacy law, especially how it works with data. Unfortunately, there are many laws that are "disgusting"... like freedom of speech if you don't like what the person says.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The victim blaming on here is astounding and disgusting, and yet one more example of a culture that seeks to shame women for being sexual beings, while at the same time feeling entitled to their bodies at all times.

- She doesn't need to apologize or explain why she took nude photos.
- The fact she took nudes for someone else doesn't entitle you to view them. Knowing that they were stolen, if you CHOOSE to seek them out, you are complicit.
- She doesn't need to justify not being super tech savvy or unable to keep them out of the cloud. Or perhaps they were hacked from her phone or computer. It doesn't matter. They were stolen.
- By the logic presented here, anyone who utilizes online banking or any form of online credit transaction deserves to have their account information stolen, disseminates, and repeatedly reposted. It is your fault if you are victimized and you should no better.

Women have a right to their own sexualiity. They have a right to choose when and with whom they want to share it.

Fuck all you shamers and apologists. Seriously. Fuck you.

Right on. I think there are a few pervs on this thread who did indeed look at the stolen nudes and don't like being told they are gross human beings.

I don't like women not being responsible for their own decisions. Im a woman and thats how I see it.
You are stupid if you don't know by now that material on phones and in clouds can be hacked. She has responsibility for her actions in this matter, the Apple service agreement even warns about it.

You are not holding women responsible for their own decisions. You are holding them responsible for the illegal and immoral actions of other people. Without some nasty asshole douchebag deciding to steal those pics, those pics stay private, as they should've, regardless of where she kept them, as long as she didn't publicly display them.

Thats right, I do not police others moral values. I do not see any expectation of privacy within the cloud service. Wanting privacy just doesn't make it so.

Really? Because you seem to have no problem calling these women "stupid."

And even today, Apple bills iCloud as secure. In fact, it states "Apple takes data security and the privacy of your personal information very seriously. iCloud is built with industry-standard security practices and employs strict policies to protect your data." It is completely reasonable to expect that her pics would remain private.

Your arguments are completely hypocritical and illogical. You claim that these women were dumb for expecting privacy in iCloud, but see no problem expecting your money to be private in an online banking account, which makes the same representations regarding privacy as iCloud does. You claim that the women are stupid and deserve what happened to them, but won't police the moral values of those who stole their private information and people who took advantage of that theft to gawk at their naked bodies without their consent. You claim to be above such foolish decisions because you take the security of your online data seriously, and then store it in a personal cloud that is significantly less secure.

Do yourself a favor. Sit down and really think about why you are holding these positions and what they say about how you view women and their sexuality.

So, you think it is criminal to share private conversations like the ones between Donald Sterling and his girlfriend?

Do yourself a favor. Sit down and really think about why you are holding these positions. You can't have it both ways.

In Maryland it is illegal to record conversations like that. Doesn't mean I like/hate the guy.
I want the law maintained and my private conversations not recorded and made public without my consent or a court order.

Exactly, in some states it is illegal and in some states it is not. Do you even know what country your data is stored, your emails, your naked pictures? What are the laws in that country? If you data is in China... well... like Google, you have no right to privacy.

Hello people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


Seriously study law. You do not understand privacy law, especially how it works with data. Unfortunately, there are many laws that are "disgusting"... like freedom of speech if you don't like what the person says.

Way to move those goalposts! We're not talking about whether or not laws were violated, although I'm pretty sure it's illegal to hack into someone's password protected account and steal their shit. But again, that's not the issue. The issue is whether a woman should still be entitled to determine who looks at her naked body, even if she takes nude photos for her own personal, private use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The victim blaming on here is astounding and disgusting, and yet one more example of a culture that seeks to shame women for being sexual beings, while at the same time feeling entitled to their bodies at all times.

- She doesn't need to apologize or explain why she took nude photos.
- The fact she took nudes for someone else doesn't entitle you to view them. Knowing that they were stolen, if you CHOOSE to seek them out, you are complicit.
- She doesn't need to justify not being super tech savvy or unable to keep them out of the cloud. Or perhaps they were hacked from her phone or computer. It doesn't matter. They were stolen.
- By the logic presented here, anyone who utilizes online banking or any form of online credit transaction deserves to have their account information stolen, disseminates, and repeatedly reposted. It is your fault if you are victimized and you should no better.

Women have a right to their own sexualiity. They have a right to choose when and with whom they want to share it.

Fuck all you shamers and apologists. Seriously. Fuck you.

sing it! Totally agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The victim blaming on here is astounding and disgusting, and yet one more example of a culture that seeks to shame women for being sexual beings, while at the same time feeling entitled to their bodies at all times.

- She doesn't need to apologize or explain why she took nude photos.
- The fact she took nudes for someone else doesn't entitle you to view them. Knowing that they were stolen, if you CHOOSE to seek them out, you are complicit.
- She doesn't need to justify not being super tech savvy or unable to keep them out of the cloud. Or perhaps they were hacked from her phone or computer. It doesn't matter. They were stolen.
- By the logic presented here, anyone who utilizes online banking or any form of online credit transaction deserves to have their account information stolen, disseminates, and repeatedly reposted. It is your fault if you are victimized and you should no better.

Women have a right to their own sexualiity. They have a right to choose when and with whom they want to share it.

Fuck all you shamers and apologists. Seriously. Fuck you.

Right on. I think there are a few pervs on this thread who did indeed look at the stolen nudes and don't like being told they are gross human beings.

I don't like women not being responsible for their own decisions. Im a woman and thats how I see it.
You are stupid if you don't know by now that material on phones and in clouds can be hacked. She has responsibility for her actions in this matter, the Apple service agreement even warns about it.

You are not holding women responsible for their own decisions. You are holding them responsible for the illegal and immoral actions of other people. Without some nasty asshole douchebag deciding to steal those pics, those pics stay private, as they should've, regardless of where she kept them, as long as she didn't publicly display them.

Thats right, I do not police others moral values. I do not see any expectation of privacy within the cloud service. Wanting privacy just doesn't make it so.

Really? Because you seem to have no problem calling these women "stupid."

And even today, Apple bills iCloud as secure. In fact, it states "Apple takes data security and the privacy of your personal information very seriously. iCloud is built with industry-standard security practices and employs strict policies to protect your data." It is completely reasonable to expect that her pics would remain private.

Your arguments are completely hypocritical and illogical. You claim that these women were dumb for expecting privacy in iCloud, but see no problem expecting your money to be private in an online banking account, which makes the same representations regarding privacy as iCloud does. You claim that the women are stupid and deserve what happened to them, but won't police the moral values of those who stole their private information and people who took advantage of that theft to gawk at their naked bodies without their consent. You claim to be above such foolish decisions because you take the security of your online data seriously, and then store it in a personal cloud that is significantly less secure.

Do yourself a favor. Sit down and really think about why you are holding these positions and what they say about how you view women and their sexuality.

I am a woman, I don't post nudes to my cloud because I also belive they could be hacked. I believe she should have known better. That mean you think that has something to do with my views on womens sexuality? I don't see a connection

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Seriously study law. You do not understand privacy law, especially how it works with data. Unfortunately, there are many laws that are "disgusting"... like freedom of speech if you don't like what the person says.

Way to move those goalposts! We're not talking about whether or not laws were violated, although I'm pretty sure it's illegal to hack into someone's password protected account and steal their shit. But again, that's not the issue. The issue is whether a woman should still be entitled to determine who looks at her naked body, even if she takes nude photos for her own personal, private use.

If she shows or gives the photo to somebody else the law says NO. She has given up her right to privacy. So if she takes a picture and sends it to her boyfriend she has NO right to privacy.

Did I look at the pictures, NO ... because I my moral compass is very strict but I don't define other people's moral compass.... besides I don't find the naked body all that mysterious. It's a naked body, okay, she has boobs. Hooray!

[FruminousBandersnatch]

Anonymous wrote:

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The victim blaming on here is astounding and disgusting, and yet one more example of a culture that seeks to shame women for being sexual beings, while at the same time feeling entitled to their bodies at all times.

- She doesn't need to apologize or explain why she took nude photos.
- The fact she took nudes for someone else doesn't entitle you to view them. Knowing that they were stolen, if you CHOOSE to seek them out, you are complicit.
- She doesn't need to justify not being super tech savvy or unable to keep them out of the cloud. Or perhaps they were hacked from her phone or computer. It doesn't matter. They were stolen.
- By the logic presented here, anyone who utilizes online banking or any form of online credit transaction deserves to have their account information stolen, disseminates, and repeatedly reposted. It is your fault if you are victimized and you should no better.

Women have a right to their own sexualiity. They have a right to choose when and with whom they want to share it.

Fuck all you shamers and apologists. Seriously. Fuck you.

Right on. I think there are a few pervs on this thread who did indeed look at the stolen nudes and don't like being told they are gross human beings.

I don't like women not being responsible for their own decisions. Im a woman and thats how I see it.
You are stupid if you don't know by now that material on phones and in clouds can be hacked. She has responsibility for her actions in this matter, the Apple service agreement even warns about it.

So by your logic a woman who wears some sexy underwear or goes commando because it turns her on or she's doing it for her lover who gets upskirted is guilty because there has been lots of publicity about creeps who take upskirt pictures and post them on the net.

And a woman who gets on a crowded subway and gets groped is responsible because we all know that happens on subways and she put herself in a position where it could happen.

And a woman who walks past a construction site is responsible for the catcalls she receives because we all know about the stereotype of construction workers who do that.

Etc., etc.

Where on that slippery slope would you propose that we stop and accept that the woman is not at fault?

Who said anything about fault. I believe it was about accepting responsibility for being careless.
Seeing a nude of a person is not the same as sexual assault. As I womn who has been rapped I find your assertion disturbing.

About what was she careless?

She did something private and put it in what is considered a reasonably secure place. She took reasonable precautions to protect herself.

Someone had to commit a crime to publish those pictures - it was not her choice and they were only published because of their sexual nature.

How is that situation different from an upskirt picture or catcalls?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Seriously study law. You do not understand privacy law, especially how it works with data. Unfortunately, there are many laws that are "disgusting"... like freedom of speech if you don't like what the person says.

Way to move those goalposts! We're not talking about whether or not laws were violated, although I'm pretty sure it's illegal to hack into someone's password protected account and steal their shit. But again, that's not the issue. The issue is whether a woman should still be entitled to determine who looks at her naked body, even if she takes nude photos for her own personal, private use.

Hacking happens all the time. So your saying because it should not don't need try to protect ourselves against it? Why would apple specifically say they could not protect against it then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder--JP Morgan just had a bunch of information hacked, including client account information. If Lawrence had her account hacked, would people be blaming her for having an online account? Do people really think that we shouldn't expect any level of privacy online? That we have no right to complain when personal information of whatever sort is stolen?

And I agree with Lawrence--the people looking at the nude pictures aren't physically assaulting her, but they are complicit in a crime.

+1

The (big) difference is that there is no longer any way to avoid having financial information online; I'm not aware of any financial institution that forswears computers entirely. So if you want to use the banking system in any way, you will be vulnerable to online hacking. And it's very hard, if not impossible, to live in the modern American economy without any access to banking: no mortgage, credit/debit cards, checking account, etc. It would be about as common, and about as practical, as trying to live off the electrical grid.

Whereas with nude selfies, it's pretty easy and obvious to avoid having this material online. I'm middle aged but I can't imagine any reasonable argument in favor of having nudie pics uploaded to the cloud. Frankly I don't see why anyone, particularly not a much photographed actress, needs nude pictures at all, but maybe I'm just old. Either way, no need whatsoever to put them online. And therefore infinitely more complicit in their eventual hacking and dissemination.

Ok, so take her storage off the net and how you do feel? Let's say she and a lover had used the Polaroid camera posted above, and all the pictures were in a safe in her house when her house was robbed. The thieves found the hard copy photos and posted them on the internet for all to see. Do you think that's a different scenario? She believed they were in a safe location because she trusted the security of that location in the same way we trust companies to keep our financial and medical information safe. It's not like she posted them on her FB page and then got upset when people looked at them. We don't look at JP Morgan or any disclosure of personal medical information and say, "Meh, that's what they deserve for using a company that stores data electronically. My doctor is safely in the 1950s and still uses paper files!"

I'm a guy, and Jennifer Lawrence is a beautiful and sexy woman, and if she were to willingly do a nude scene in a movie or a spread in Playboy I would happily enjoy it because that would be her choice to share. I have not gone looking for and do not want to see pictures stolen from her because the display is not by her choice.

There's so much in the media today about how women deal with objectifying looks, catcalls and harassing behavior just for the crime of being female and being in public that I'm astounded at the victim blaming on a site that has a majority female membership. Even though she is a celebrity, she now has to walk around wondering if every person she meets, every guy she interacts with, has seen her private, nude photos.

*stands and applauds* EXACTLY

+1- eloquent and exactly the issue

the issue is NOT about being smart with one's storage online!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don't like women not being responsible for their own decisions. Im a woman and thats how I see it.
You are stupid if you don't know by now that material on phones and in clouds can be hacked. She has responsibility for her actions in this matter, the Apple service agreement even warns about it.

You are stupid if you don't know by now that material stored in your home can be stolen. If you keep stuff in your home, you are responsible if someone steals it.

You are stupid if you don't know by now that your wallet can be stolen. If you keep money in your wallet, you are responsible if someone steals it.

You are stupid if you don't know by now that banks can be robbed. If you put money in a bank account, you are responsible if someone steals it.

You are stupid if you don't know by now that hackers can steal online information. If you have a bank account with online access or a credit card that you use for online purposes or an email account that you use to send personal mail to friends and family, you are responsible if someone hacks the account and steals your money or personal information.


Do you see how stupid this argument sounds in any other context?

[FruminousBandersnatch]

Anonymous wrote:

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't like women not being responsible for their own decisions. Im a woman and thats how I see it.
You are stupid if you don't know by now that material on phones and in clouds can be hacked. She has responsibility for her actions in this matter, the Apple service agreement even warns about it.

So by your logic a woman who wears some sexy underwear or goes commando because it turns her on or she's doing it for her lover who gets upskirted is guilty because there has been lots of publicity about creeps who take upskirt pictures and post them on the net.

And a woman who gets on a crowded subway and gets groped is responsible because we all know that happens on subways and she put herself in a position where it could happen.

And a woman who walks past a construction site is responsible for the catcalls she receives because we all know about the stereotype of construction workers who do that.

Etc., etc.

Where on that slippery slope would you propose that we stop and accept that the woman is not at fault?

Who said anything about fault. I believe it was about accepting responsibility for being careless.
Seeing a nude of a person is not the same as sexual assault. As I womn who has been rapped I find your assertion disturbing.

About what was she careless?

She did something private and put it in what is considered a reasonably secure place. She took reasonable precautions to protect herself.

Someone had to commit a crime to publish those pictures - it was not her choice and they were only published because of their sexual nature.

How is that situation different from an upskirt picture or catcalls?

Resonable privacy.....when the company clearly states it cant not accept liability for hacking, I guess the diference is in what you think reasonable is. Publishing internet images is a copyright thing you would need legal advise on that.

There are a couple of different legal issues mixed up in your post.

First, she saved the pictures in a location that advertises itself as secure, and that she reasonably believed was a safe place to store such things. The fact that the fine print of Apple's terms of use says that they are not legally liable if a third party breaks in and steals the stuff that is stored there is simply a function of contract law, not an abdication of any responsibility on their part. The language in the Apple terms of use basically says that as long as Apple made reasonable efforts to protect her stuff, she can't sue them for failing to protect it.

As discussed above, more than likely your agreement with your bank says that you can't sue them if they get robbed, but you put your money there anyway. Your money is insured up to a certain amount, and that's all you'll get. Every contract you sign or terms of use you accept has similar limitations of liability in them to protect the business you're contracting with.

Like a bank, Apple works very hard on their security and has teams of people dedicated to keeping the stuff stored there safe.

Theoretically, Jennifer Lawrence could sue the thieves and any website posting the pictures and anyone emailing the pictures around for copyright violations. That would be an incredibly expensive game of whack-a-mole that would, at best, result in some of the pictures being taken down and the possibility that she might collect some monetary damages, but that doesn't change what was done to her.

Imagine that you wrote explicit, very kinky sexual fantasies in your diary. You keep the diary in your safe deposit box at your bank. Someone breaks into your bank, steals the diary and publishes your sexual fantasies online under your name. They become the next viral meme and get posted all over the world. You are horribly embarrassed and are forced to wonder who among your neighbors, family, friends, business contacts, etc. has read them, shared them, etc.

Here's a selection from a Safe Deposit Box Lease Agreement from a bank:

Our Duty Our duty is to use reasonable care to prevent anyone from opening the box other than you or your appointed deputy (agent) or court appointed representative, except as we may otherwise be required or permitted by law.
...
Liability Although your safe deposit box is designed to be fire- and water-resistant and burglar-resistant, we do not guarantee absolute safety nor are we liable for any contents that are claimed to be lost. Except for the duty specifically stated above, we have no liability for any damage to the contents of your box even if the damage resulted from our negligence. (emphasis added)

The whole internet comes alive with people talking about how careless you were and how you should recognize your responsibility for the fact that those fantasies were disclosed to the public.

Do you think making a claim of copyright infringement against all of the sites where your fantasies are posted will help?

How is that situation different?

[Anonymous]

Theoretically, Jennifer Lawrence could sue the thieves and any website posting the pictures and anyone emailing the pictures around for copyright violations. That would be an incredibly expensive game of whack-a-mole that would, at best, result in some of the pictures being taken down and the possibility that she might collect some monetary damages, but that doesn't change what was done to her.

Copyright belongs to the person that took the picture. So if it was a selfie, maybe, but if somebody else took the picture Jenn can't claim a copyright violation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't like women not being responsible for their own decisions. Im a woman and thats how I see it.
You are stupid if you don't know by now that material on phones and in clouds can be hacked. She has responsibility for her actions in this matter, the Apple service agreement even warns about it.

You are stupid if you don't know by now that material stored in your home can be stolen. If you keep stuff in your home, you are responsible if someone steals it.

You are stupid if you don't know by now that your wallet can be stolen. If you keep money in your wallet, you are responsible if someone steals it.

You are stupid if you don't know by now that banks can be robbed. If you put money in a bank account, you are responsible if someone steals it.

You are stupid if you don't know by now that hackers can steal online information. If you have a bank account with online access or a credit card that you use for online purposes or an email account that you use to send personal mail to friends and family, you are responsible if someone hacks the account and steals your money or personal information.


Do you see how stupid this argument sounds in any other context?

Important stuff in my home: I have insurance
Wallet: remember traveler's checks, yes you are stupid if you carry lots of cash
banks: FDIC
Online: Use a credit card, it is protected, Debit cards are not.

Be responsible people.

[FruminousBandersnatch]

Anonymous wrote:

Theoretically, Jennifer Lawrence could sue the thieves and any website posting the pictures and anyone emailing the pictures around for copyright violations. That would be an incredibly expensive game of whack-a-mole that would, at best, result in some of the pictures being taken down and the possibility that she might collect some monetary damages, but that doesn't change what was done to her.

Copyright belongs to the person that took the picture. So if it was a selfie, maybe, but if somebody else took the picture Jenn can't claim a copyright violation.

My point was a response to the person who wrote this -

Publishing internet images is a copyright thing you would need legal advise on that.

As you correctly note, it's possible that she might not have any recourse under copyright law.

But the real point is that, at best, copyright law would enable her to send takedown notices and get monetary damages, but it can't make the pictures unseen and isn't really a tool designed to deal with this issue.