Kiwis slap 'vacant' sign on Paris Hilton
Paris Hilton's lawyers are preparing to move against the New Zealand firm who thought it would be a bit of wheeze to advertise empty billboard space in Auckland by sticking up a fetching snap of El Reg's fave celebutard with the slogan "Vacant". According to the Sunday Star Times, the outrage (pic here) is the work of Media5, …
You can pull it now, it's done it's magic, plus I am sure the image will live on across the internet for evermore!
Well done!
Paste "NOT" above vacant on the billboards?
That is a more a move to make the celebutard's lawyers some easy folding money, rather than being anything to do with Ms Hilton.
They are a particularly pernicious and despicable lowlife breed,aren't they. Oops, sorry, that should read .... They can be so often.
They'll be coming after you next unless you drop the Paris Hilton icon.
Now we all get to see it. Of course, it's interesting that they're not claiming any sort of defamation, just that an image has been used without consent.
I would have enjoyed a lawsuit with Paris trying to claim she isn't 'vacant'.
No. They seem to be trying to stop the anoying Ausie and Kiwi passive agreesivness. This is what lawers are for.
I usually try to refrain from doing this, but surely all that needs to be said is "Win"?
All she'd have to do is show them a certain video. Definitely not vacant in at least one sense of the word...
Otherwise I find this utterly perfect.
When will people ever learn? By grumbling about this innocious billboard, they've instantly catapulted the image to worldwide fame, making the effect many times worse than it would have originally been
Vaaa-aaaaa-CANT!
Sorry, so sorry. I'm gone. Mine's the one with the copy of "Never Mind The Bollocks" in the pocket.
suggest Ms Hilton is a void waiting to be filled!
Oh.. wait...
It's probably worth knowing that Paris Hilton actually takes her own decisions. She has advisers, but decisions are hers, and hers only. No committee, no shareholders, no BS - just her..
Technically, anything with more brain matter than an amphioxus can arguably said to "take" its own decisions...
What Anonymous Coward above said.
And I suspect PH has rather more money than most of this site's readers too.
(I'm no PH fan myself; I barely follow the mainstream media as it's so crushingly boring. Forbes suggests she's earned at least 15 million dollars to date. If that makes her 'vacant', what the hell does that make *you*?)
"When will people ever learn? By grumbling about this innocious billboard, they've instantly catapulted the image to worldwide fame, making the effect many times worse than it would have originally been"
Have you considered that, maybe, that is the desired consequence? There's no such thing as bad publicity. Maybe people are wising up to the Streisand effect and putting it to their own uses.
Usually, although Gary Glitter may not agree.
"...she has a proven ability to laugh at herself"
So it would be OK to harness that ability for your private profit? And presumably OK under NZ law to use an image of the bloke in the pub who has the same "proven ability"?
Business; can't live with it, can't shoot it.
Sorry to shatter your illusions chap, but having lots of money is not an indicator of intellectual prowess. Britney Spears shaves her head, falls down drunk in the street, lip-syncs to songs written by someone else and can't look after her own kids, but she is still one of the top earning entertainers in the world. Paris' earning potential is based on her celebrity status, not any innate abilities.
"Forbes suggests she's earned at least 15 million dollars to date. If that makes her 'vacant', what the hell does that make *you*?)"
Ummm, less pretty and without a mega rich father perhaps?
Forget what their boilerplate derision makes them. Instead you might consider pondering what your bizarre little spiel says about you. You somehow managed to go from a cliched bit of whining about how mainstream media is ever so boring to defending the intelligence of a wealthy heiress based on her income.
Which is so sensible, as it is well established that money equals intelligence. That's how we know that Haitians are stupid and George W. Bush is humanity's greatest living genius. After all, they eat dirt and he was the leader of a wealthy nation. Who cares that both he and Professor Hilton would be nothing without their last names and have each done more to damage their respective brands than any outsider ever could have? They got ahead, and so the net loss which their behavior incurred on society is of no consequence, right?
The true beauty is that you attempt to support your silly argument with a reference to Forbes, which is the business world equivalent of People magazine. Well done, sir, well done!
One more vote for Paris clearly being an intelligent, entertaining, imaginative, fun, and enterprising individual. Anyone who thinks otherwise probably hasn't paused to have an original thought on the subject, and is merely parroting the mainstream opinion. I suspect she would be a fabulous dinner companion.
(I'm the A/C @ 14:40)
I have had dealings with her company. It's not an assumption..
... according to Rule 34, there WILL be porn about this.
From some of the responses it seems like people don't fully comprehend the meanings of "vacant".
She has more money than us.. oh gee. Well, I guess if my dad had more money than cells in his body then some of that MIGHT trickle down to me!
Also: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/27/hilton_financial_woes/
If I got paid twice a year's wages to go to a nightclub for an hour I'd find it exceptionally easy to be rich.
If you can type in this comment box you've already achieved a rank higher than "socialite".
Vacant:
1 : not occupied by an incumbent, possessor, or officer <a vacant office> <vacant thrones>
2 : being without content or occupant <a vacant seat on a bus> <a vacant room>
3 : free from activity or work : disengaged <vacant hours>
4 : devoid of thought, reflection, or expression <a vacant smile>
5 : not lived in <vacant houses>
Advert is taken to mean 4 (in relation to Hilton) but they can swing it they meant 3 (clearly 1-2 is what the advert is selling) (unless she's under employ as a socialite to an equally vacuous company.. but then they can plead factual mistake. No harm done.)
She might have received copious quantities of money; that I grant you, but "earned"? Not in a million years, old Son!
She is in good company then: along with other celebs, footballers, footballers wives and stockbrokers. All questionable in their value to society but soooo wonderful to watch, pontifact and prevaricate about. It's all about the brand and brand awareness and protection.
Earning I leave to nurses, miners , careworkers and North Sea fishermen et al.
What gets me is how long it's taken to come to the appropriate legal attention. These placeholder billboards have been around Wellington for years.
