Celebrity Justice
Pitt/Jolie Legal Threat


Re:    
Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt/Stolen Photos

          Our File No.: 2583-20

Dear Sir/Madam:

        Recently, a digital memory card containing a number of personal copyright protected photographs of our clients was stolen.  The police are currently investigating this matter.  The photos depict, among other things, private moments and images of our clients and/or their minor children, taken in Namibia, including images from a private baby shower (the "Stolen Photos").  It is obvious to anyone viewing the Stolen Photos that they were taken in private, on private property and that they could only have been taken by our clients and/or a family member, who own all right title and interest thereto.

        We understand that the person who stole the Stolen Photos, or an accomplice, has been offering them for sale to the various media outlets and celebrity content websites, and may have offered the Stolen Photos to you.

        This letter is to provide you with notice that the Stolen Photos are copyright protected, to which my clients own right and title thereto.  Any unauthorized publication, reproduction or dissemination of the Stolen Photos constitutes an infringement of my clients' copyrights in violation of the U.S. Copyright Act, Title 17 of the United States Code Section 101, et seq., and exposes you, and anyone else acting in concert with you, to civil liability, damages, injunctive relief and reimbursement of all attorneys' fees and costs incurred by my clients in connection with any copyright infringement action. Furthermore, if any monies are paid for the purchase of the Stolen Photos, you will be engaged in the purchase of stolen property.

        In addition, under the circumstances that the Stolen Photos were taken, namely, at private and personal events on private property, my clients had a reasonable expectation of enjoying total privacy.  The publication of the photos would therefore constitute a unlawful invasion and violation of my clients' right of privacy and would also be an unauthorized commercial appropriation of their names, likenesses and personas.

         Anyone who publishes, disseminates, displays or otherwise exploits the Stolen Photos will be liable for substantial compensatory damages, punitive damages, and injunctive relief.  If you publish or disseminate and of the Stolen Photos, our clients will take further legal action to protect their rights, including by the filing of a lawsuit seeking compensatory and punitive damages, statutory damages for copyright violations, and attorneys' fees.

        On behalf of our clients, we request as follows:

        1.      If you or any of your employees or agents are/have been approached and offered the right to acquire and publish any of the Photos, or are approached in any way with regard to the Photos, we ask that you immediately contact either myself or Evan Spiegel at Lavely & Singer at (310) 556-3501 x 238 or 247, so that the matter may be referred to the criminal authorities; and

        2.      That you cease and desist from exploiting, publishing, posting, distributing, or
otherwise using or disseminating (with or without monetary charge) any of the Stolen Photos, through any venue or medium, including but not limited to on your website.

        Please govern yourself accordingly.

        This letter does not purport to constitute a complete or exhaustive statement of all of our clients' rights, contentions or legal theories.  Nothing contained herein is intended as, nor should it be deemed to constitute, a waiver or relinquishment of any of our clients' rights or remedies, whether legal or equitable, all of which are hereby expressly reserved.

                              Sincerely,

                                                        [via e-mail]    YAEL E. HOLTKAMP For

                              LAVELY & SINGER
                              PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

cc:    Mr. Brad Pitt
        Ms. Angelina Jolie
        Ms. Cynthia Pett-Dante
        Ms. Cindy Guagenti
        Jon Liebman, Esq.
        Robert Offer, Esq.
        Mr. Geyer Kosinski
        John H. Lavely, Jr, Esq.
        Martin D. Singer, Esq.
        Evan N. Spiegel, Esq.
2583-20\Let\YEH-Stolen Photos 062406                                    © Lavely & Singer, P.C. 2006




Filed under: Celebrity Justice, Brad & Angelina

Reader Comments

(Page 5 of 5)Previous 15 Comments

61. I am so sick of these prima donnas! The letter from the attorney says the pictures were "stolen" by the owners or a family member along with an accomplice. I bet it's her brother and he is jealous of Pitt.


They were stolen from someone NOT in the family and that they are the personal property of the OWNERS please reread the article. No matter how famous they are, they have the right to privacy concerning a child. The child never asked for the publicity.

Posted at 1:59AM on Jun 27th 2006 by caresnotbear

62. O.K. So here is the deal. Celebs know what the are getting into when they become actors, one of the reasons to become one is to be famous. What do they expect? The rules will bend for them? Brad a cheat and Angelina a homewrecker! I say its Karma coming back at them! Deal with the loss of the pics, karma is nothing to mess with. While I am on the subject of Brad and Angelina, why help the 3rd world countries? Why not help your own people in your own country? If you want to help those countries, go live there and try to make money off your movies there. What it won't happen in a 3rd world country? Exactly! Protect your own country! Geez!

Posted at 9:27AM on Jun 27th 2006 by N.

63. Perhaps those claiming that the likes of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie should "get over it" should, in turn, get over themselves. Yes, Brad and Angelina are in the Acting profession and recieve their level of stardom from the success of the films they are in. The success of the films may be directly (or perhaps I should say more visably) by our attendance of those movies, but in order for us to attend in the droves that we do, the acting cast has to do a pretty darn good job. What do I mean? That we're not the only ones contributing to the success of actors and actresses... they are too.

As for whether or not the insane photo taking... the photographers are men and women who hide in bushes, sit in boats, and often use telephoto lenses second only to those used by Intelligence agencies and in some cases filmmakers (as far as range is concerned) which means that we are *not* seing photos of chance sightings during the actors/actresses in question go about their daily lives, we're seeing pictures that someone most likely took pretty extreme measures to acquire. Only the likes of a 'Peeping Tom' would consider taking such lengths to get a photo a 'legit' practice or that we have a right to take such extreme measures to get what are so loosely called 'candid' photos these days.

Don't forget... our attendance of a film may contribute to the success or failure of a film and its cast, but those same films are offering us an escape and the good ones take us away fro reality for a while. The key is to come *back* to reality when the film is over. We've made Perdue, Johnson & Johnson, Kleenex, Tylenol, Bayer, and many, many other product/family names household names but do we see any of them with dozens of freelance photographers outside their homes, crouched in bushes, fairing waves in boats or circling their estates in helicopters, do we? And no, there's no difference between the two catagories. While Actors and Actresses may have photo shoots and publicize their images Brand Name companies do the same thing except we call *their* photo shoots 'commercials'.

Posted at 11:54AM on Jun 27th 2006 by KhajAsh

64. To "SickofThem" :
If you read the letter from the law firm carefully, it states they were taken in private, on private property and could have only been taken by a client/family member, who own all title and interest. -- Not that they stole them, just that they took the pictures and own all rights to them (the family). I know it is confusing, I had to read it twice also. ~~ I applaud Brad and Angelina for their decision to "beat the papparazzi" at their own game, and sell those baby pics for 4 mil. They would have been hounded to no end for them .... and then to donate the monies laid out for those pics? How admirable! Angelina and Brad have every right to be angered by this invasion of privacy over those stolen pics and I hope they find out who did it and hang them by their balls.

Posted at 6:29PM on Jun 27th 2006 by Lilly

65. That suxs! I hope they find their property and the jerk who invaded their privacy.

Posted at 6:55PM on Jun 27th 2006 by Jennifer

66. I agree with post number 10, what terrible representation, not only was it grammatically incorrect it was also mis-structured/disjointed and why would a firm of supposed repute or any explain "the private moments" "the baby shower" etc, none of that is needed to get the warning across. Smells too fishy.

I never saw the pictures. I am human and inquisitive, and thus would loourrvee to see them. In my opinion they, despite their supposed philanthropic ventures, are lucky to pique my interest.

However such private moments should not be made public viewing without consent. Forget for a moment the privacy vs freedom of press argument, because basically the two fringe on each other, a pregnant woman is tender, hypersensitive, low on self esteem, bubbling with joy, and really really insecure with her body yet adoring it too at the same time. Alone, we are complex creatures. A pregnant woman carries the complexity of someone else along with her own.

Brad and Angelina do not need to seek attention, but the legal response or rather its lack of coherency, worries me. Smells too fishy.

BTW let's stop slacking each other off. We are neither as rich, as well paid nor as GORGE as they. :)

Posted at 12:52AM on Jun 29th 2006 by Angel

67. To sean:

You have obviously never read/seen a formal and professional letter. Please, do tell of these grammatical "errors" and "redundancies". I read through it again because I thought that your comment was funny and wanted to join in on the ridicule of these super-fancy high-powered lawyers; but I found absolutely none.

I think that before you criticize someone you need to take a nice look at your own ignorance.

As for the person that stole the pictures; I hope that they are prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Just because these people are famous actors does not mean that we have the right to force ourselves into their homes and private lives.

Posted at 1:28AM on Jun 29th 2006 by Yeah, right

68. Brad and Angelina have enough money. Can't some kind lawyer help the two guys who were trying to make a little money for themselves? Why do rich people always get to have everything and we don't? I hope Brad and Angelina will think in their heart and let these guys just have a few of their private pictures. What would it hurt? I am in the US illegally, but it looks like I will be forgiven and so should these two guys.

Peter Gozynia

Posted at 11:05AM on Jul 2nd 2006 by Peter Gozynia

69. Backtrack...it was Angelina Jolie's slimy and unsuccessful brother, James Haven who took the photos of the baby shower, it was Jolie 's brother James Haven, that brought the camera to be fixed?- leaving in the memory card.
James Haven, a failed and unsuccessful actor brother of Jolie's is the real threat to the Jolie-Pitts.Does Angelina Jolie want her brother, James Haven to hang
out with her children now, espercially Shiloh?
I wouldn't trust Jolie's brother, James Haven, who has not made a go at his career, near anywhere Jolie's kids. The next thing we hear is Shiloh is missing, James Haven was babysitting....Argh! What a frightening scenerio.

Posted at 11:34AM on Jul 3rd 2006 by May

70. Isn't it funny how someone with Jolies' talent ca just go adopt a child. And now she wants to adpot more. Pretty soon she will have her own cheap labor. She will get those children to do for her because it would be cheaper to put them to work. . How much money do they make working 10 cents an hr. She will fire her staff as soon as she can train them to work for her...

Posted at 5:32AM on Jul 8th 2006 by DOTTIE

71. Being a card carrying member of a bar (not California though) I can see where the rush to get out a cease and desist letter might cause one's representation to send off a letter full of typos--the lawyers were probably hoping that the letter would reach the right parties before the photos made it to the web (and once the photos are on the web, they're pretty much out of the celeb's control *forever*).

However, since this letter is likely to be reused the next time some celeb's private family photos/audio/video are taken and could be uploaded at any time, it would be a good idea for this firm to *PROOFREAD* and *CORRECT* the electronic copy that will serve as their future template for situations like these.

And by the way, if you bother to read any of the other 'court documents' (we call them 'pleadings' in the trade) that this firm has filed, they are pretty sloppily written and contain spelling errors and typos too. I know for a fact that cases have been lost due to attorney carelessness with drafting (it's a common tactic I've used to *win* cases for my clients, pointing out those situations to the judge(s) my cases are heard by), so I'm not as impressed with this firm as Harvey is. Their threatening tone can at times be amusing, but I'd rather be represented by someone who made a clear, concise, convincing, and deadly accurate presentation of the facts and the law.

Posted at 12:49AM on Aug 2nd 2006 by txlawyer

72. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE BIG DEAL IS. WHY STEAL? THEY ARE JUST 2 NORMAL PEOPLE, EVERY ONE IS IN THEIR BUSINESS. THEY CAN NOT EVEN GO THE THE RESTROOM WITHOUT A HELICOPTER FLYING OVERHEAD. I HATE A THIEF.

Posted at 5:01PM on Aug 3rd 2006 by Robin

Previous 15 Comments

Hot Tips