Suicide Girls?

[Adam Rixey]

On 10/15/05, Christopher tm <xopher.tm at gmail.com> wrote:
> There _are_ exceptions and I'm not anti-porn, but - and let's face it
> - men are scum... I don't care how many lip rings you have, if you're
> naked in front of a camera, the guy holding the contract owns you. Or
> thinks he does, which amounts to the same thing.

True, but I don't see how this is different from any other business. 
Say I have a contract to develop software for some company.  I plug
along for awhile, then get disgusted with the fact that I'm workin'
for The Man and quit.  I can rant and raise a ruckus and post on
online blogs about how they should immediately stop using the code I
made for them, but tough nuts.  I signd a contract to make a product
for them which they now own.  They can do whatever the hell they want
with it.

Now if suicidegirls is suddenly using these girls' images to make
zootropes or doggy chewtoys or something else not covered in the
contract, then they may have a beef.  Or the site owners could not be
dicks and respond to requests out of niceness, but again -- THEY DON'T
HAVE TO.

Frankly, I'm surprised it took this long for something to come up. 
Get a group of more than any five goths, strippers, or online diary
keepers together and there's gonna be drama.  Suicidegirls is an
unholy combination of all three.  The , creating a feedback loop of
drama, backstabbing, and tackily tattooed tits which threatens to
envelop all life in the universe if left unchecked.  If only we could
harness this energy for good instead of evil, humankind may survive.

--
Adam Rixey
arixey at gmail.com