Stars Sue for Child Abuse.

[theprestige]

"You are profiting from our (illegal) exploitation. Justice demands that we get cut in for a piece of that action." I think it's the newly-minted "illegal" bit that creates the opportunity here, for the plaintiffs. The profit sharing from the original legal exploitation would have been thoroughly addressed in their original contracts.

 

[JoeMorgue]

"You are profiting from our (illegal) exploitation. Justice demands that we get cut in for a piece of that action."

Good way to dismiss victims wanting financial compensation.

 

[lobosrul5]

If you don't want liability don't form a corporation that has all the rights of a human person.

ETA: Or to be more concise does Paramount still own the rights to the 1968 version of R&J? Are they still collecting royalties on it? Well there you go then.

Anytime a corporation buys another one, they assume their liabilities, but thats not what Checkmite was saying. Was Paramount ever legally responsible for actions on the set of a film made in Italy, that they may not have known about*, just because they purchased distribution rights in the United States?

*I believe their suit is also alleging more wrongdoing on the set than them simply being under 18 at the time.

FYI the production companies are listed as:

BHE Films
Verona Produzione
Dino de Laurentiis Cinematografica

Not Paramount.

 

[lobosrul5]

"You are profiting from our (illegal) exploitation. Justice demands that we get cut in for a piece of that action." I think it's the newly-minted "illegal" bit that creates the opportunity here, for the plaintiffs. The profit sharing from the original legal exploitation would have been thoroughly addressed in their original contracts.

I'm very confused on the legality/illegality bit... there was child nudity in an episode of Game of Thrones and then of course theres a naked baby on the cover of a very well known alternative rock album by Nirvana from the 1990's.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

film: A Matter of Life and Death

The 1946 Powell and Pressburger film "A Matter of Life and Death"* had a little nudity: "But wait we go back to colour, Peter wakes up on a beach, thinking it is heaven he discover a small boy sun bathing naked and learns that no it's not heaven and then he meets June, cycling past." I don't know of any controversy regarding the 1946 film,* and 1968's "Romeo and Juliet" is hardly pornographic. BTW the 1946 film is called "Stairway to Heaven in the USA," not to be confused with the album of the same name.
*EDT, This scene was cut from the American release, possibly owing to the Hays code.

 

[lobosrul5]

The 1946 Powell and Pressburger film "A Matter of Life and Death"* had a little nudity: "But wait we go back to colour, Peter wakes up on a beach, thinking it is heaven he discover a small boy sun bathing naked and learns that no it's not heaven and then he meets June, cycling past." I don't know of any controversy regarding the 1946 film, and 1968's "Romeo and Juliet" is not much more revealing.
*also sometimes called "Stairway to Heaven," not to be confused with the album of the same name.

... one of my favorite films of all time, though maybe just below The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (also from the "Archers").

There's also a very a famous, well regarded, old French movie called The Wages of Fear that has a nude boy... should the US distributor of that film face a lawsuit? Should that kid, or his descendants get half a billion dollars?

 

[Arcade22]

I'm not sure that it matters, really, or that it even should.

As a society, we have this kind of schizophrenic foible where we decide that people who were exploited in certain ways are entitled to certain kinds of compensation, but then turn around and scrutinize the motives or character of people who move to claim it, even though they might objectively qualify under the rules.

Is it really strange for people to find it objectionable that one can be entitled to compensation for being subject to something that one not only consented to but also enjoyed or otherwise benefited from?

 

[Bob001]

Is it really strange for people to find it objectionable that one can be entitled to compensation for being subject to something that one not only consented to but also enjoyed or otherwise benefited from?

There's a general legal presumption that minors can't give consent to certain activities. That's what statutory rape is about. In this case, two teenagers may have been encouraged to do something by agents, directors etc. that wasn't in their best interests and that they later, with maturity, came to regret. There's also a question about not just what appeared on screen, but how they were treated during filming. If that few seconds of screen time required them to be naked for hours in front a lot of people on the set, and maybe be filmed in ways that weren't actually used, that would be exploitative by itself. And, of course, we've learned a lot more about these issues in the last 50+ years.

Child actor vs. rich powerful studio? I'm on the actor's side every time.

 

[theprestige]

There's a general legal presumption that minors can't give consent to certain activities. That's what statutory rape is about. In this case, two teenagers may have been encouraged to do something by agents, directors etc. that wasn't in their best interests and that they later, with maturity, came to regret. There's also a question about not just what appeared on screen, but how they were treated during filming. If that few seconds of screen time required them to be naked for hours in front a lot of people on the set, and maybe be filmed in ways that weren't actually used, that would be exploitative by itself. And, of course, we've learned a lot more about these issues in the last 50+ years.

Child actor vs. rich powerful studio? I'm on the actor's side every time.

Maybe these former child actors should be suing their managers, then. Or their parents. Paramount enters into good faith agreements with the legal guardians and legitimate agents of these kids. Now they're on the hook because the people whose duty of care it was are all dead, and their successors lack deep pockets? Boop to that.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

Maybe these former child actors should be suing their managers, then. Or their parents. Paramount enters into good faith agreements with the legal guardians and legitimate agents of these kids. Now they're on the hook because the people whose duty of care it was are all dead, and their successors lack deep pockets? Boop to that.

If I take advantage of a child, I have no responsibility because the legal guardian/representative didn't protect them?

Just because I entered into a "good faith" agreement doesn't mean squat if I knew what I was doing is wrong. You can't enter into a contract to do an illegal thing.

ETA: I'm not trying to absolve any of the other adults involved, I think there's blame to go around. (If there is blame at all; I'm not making a judgement on this particular case. Just disagreeing with the notion that the responsibility is all on one side.)

 

[Bob001]

Maybe these former child actors should be suing their managers, then. Or their parents. Paramount enters into good faith agreements with the legal guardians and legitimate agents of these kids. Now they're on the hook because the people whose duty of care it was are all dead, and their successors lack deep pockets? Boop to that.

Just as minors can't consent to sex, neither can their parents or agents give consent for them. Do you think a child molester should walk because he paid his victim's father? Parents can't sell their kids. People and corporations are responsible for their actions, particularly when they are crimes, no matter what they signed.

 

[KDLarsen]

I'm very confused on the legality/illegality bit... there was child nudity in an episode of Game of Thrones and then of course theres a naked baby on the cover of a very well known alternative rock album by Nirvana from the 1990's.

And then there's the cover of Scorpion's Virgin Killer album. That one managed to get the associated Wikipedia paged added to the UK internet blacklist for a brief period.

Edit: For those concerned about potentially viewing illegal content, the front page has a photo of a naked underage girl, with a bit of graphic to cover her vulva.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Holy Houses, Batman

There are also nude children the album cover of Led Zeppelin's Houses of the Holy, which was inspired by one of Arthur C. Clarke's works. I am not sure whether or not this Zeppelin would fly today.

 

[Arcade22]

There's a general legal presumption that minors can't give consent to certain activities. That's what statutory rape is about.

Even when the law is written that way it's not reasonable to treat it as some kind of absolute truth, especially with regards to civil claims.

 

[theprestige]

Just as minors can't consent to sex, neither can their parents or agents give consent for them. Do you think a child molester should walk because he paid his victim's father? Parents can't sell their kids. People and corporations are responsible for their actions, particularly when they are crimes, no matter what they signed.

If parents or agents or managers agree to let their minor charge be exploited, they should be held responsible for that, yes? They're a lot closer to the decision than the distant head office of the parent company of the production.

 

[TragicMonkey]

If parents or agents or managers agree to let their minor charge be exploited, they should be held responsible for that, yes? They're a lot closer to the decision than the distant head office of the parent company of the production.

Responsibility for actions rests with all parties involved, not just "the closest". Determining to what degree each party was involved, and what actions if any are then pursued, is one of the functions of the legal system.

 

[Samson]

There are also nude children the album cover of Led Zeppelin's Houses of the Holy, which was inspired by one of Arthur C. Clarke's works. I am not sure whether or not this Zeppelin would fly today.

Those young animals depicted belong to a species Desmond Morris described in his 1967 book
The Naked Ape.
An interesting read.

 

[kookbreaker]

Case dismissed

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/romeo-juliet-lawsuit-thrown-out-nude-scene-1235625534/