If Jennifer Lawrence wants the world to see her topless, it’ll be on her terms. Posing shirtless for fashion photographer Patrick Demarchelier, the 24-year-old actress covers Vanity Fair’s November issue. In the profile, Lawrence breaks her silence about having dozens of nude pictures stolen and distributed online.

“I was just so afraid,” she says. “I didn’t know how this would affect my career.”

The actress, who has always been guarded about her private life, was shocked when the photo leaked. “Just because I’m a public figure, just because I’m an actress, does not mean that I asked for this. It does not mean that it comes with the territory. It’s my body, and it should be my choice, and the fact that it is not my choice is absolutely disgusting. I can’t believe that we even live in that kind of world,” she opines.

Lawrence was tempted to write a statement in August, but reconsidered. “Every single thing that I tried to write made me cry or get angry. I started to write an apology, but I don’t have anything to say I’m sorry for. I was in a loving, healthy, great relationship [with Nicholas Hoult] for four years,” she recalls. “It was long distance, and either your boyfriend is going to look at porn or he’s going to look at you.”

The actress, who is currently dating Coldplay’s Chris Martin, wants to clarify something about the invasion of privacy: “It is not a scandal. It is a sex crime. It is a sexual violation. It’s disgusting,” she says.

“The law needs to be changed, and we need to change. That’s why these websites are responsible,” she continues. “Just the fact that somebody can be sexually exploited and violated, and the first thought that crosses somebody’s mind is to make a profit from it. It’s so beyond me. I just can’t imagine being that detached from humanity. I can’t imagine being that thoughtless and careless and so empty inside.”

The F.B.I. is currently investigating the photo hacking, and attorney Martin Singer is representing 12 unnamed “actresses, models and athletes” whose private photos were stolen and published online. IN addition to threatening a $100 million lawsuit, Singer alleged that Google did not act “expeditiously and responsibly” to remove the images from its search results. Singer also claimed that “pervert predators” had stolen the pictures from his clients. Google later responded, saying, “We’ve removed tens of thousands of pictures, within hours of the requests being made, and we have closed hundreds of accounts…The Internet is used for many good things. Stealing people’s private photos is not one of them.”

On Wednesday, attorney Marty Singer slammed Google in a letter that threatened a lawsuit with at least $100 million in damages for allegedly facilitating the posting of hacked nude photos.

Although Singer was silent about exactly whom he was representing, records of takedown requests indicate he’s challenging Google’s conduct on behalf of Jennifer Lawrence, Kirsten Dunst, Kate Upton and other stars. According to Singer, Google isn’t abiding by its responsibilities under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to expeditiously remove owned images on platforms that include YouTube and Blogspot, nor is it being diligent about the URLs in its search engine.

A Google spokesperson has provided an official response:

“We’ve removed tens of thousands of pictures — within hours of the requests being made — and we have closed hundreds of accounts. The Internet is used for many good things. Stealing people’s private photos is not one of them.”

Google says that it is removing photos because they represent violations of its community guidelines with respect to nudity and privacy violations. The web giant says its turnaround is generally hours, not weeks.

As for search, Google says it has historically taken a different approach — removing items when they receive valid copyright notices.

The key word there is “valid,” as Google could be taking extra scrutiny when determining the validity of a copyright claim. For example, if Justin Verlander sends a takedown request of a Kate Upton “selfie,” Google could be determining that it’s Upton — not Verlander — who has the authority to come forward.

There are other considerations including possible fair use that come into play, and generally, platforms like YouTube have allowed counter-notices to copyright claims. Whatever the reasons, Google is not acting sufficiently in Singer’s mind.

Interestingly, some of the most on-point case law on what search engines must do is provided by Google’s battles with Perfect10 over thumbnail images of nude photos. An appeals court rejected any direct copyright infringement claim but left open the possibility of contributory liability if a defendant had knowledge of another’s infringing materials and materially contributes to or induces that infringement.

It’s a case that Singer is surely aware of after litigating a linking to of Quentin Tarantino’s leaked script earlier this year.

Credit: Hollywood Reporter.com