Really, it's just comes down to a matter of what she is legally able to do here. Was it right for GGW to use her footage? Legally, yes. Morally, no. However, morality should not enter into a legal decision and it did not in this case.
She did not say "no" to the filming, that is quite clear. There are nearly 24 seconds of her dancing, laughing, flirting with the camera and, unfortunately, her breasts are bared by a person other than the GGW crew. Why not then would you not expect them to use that footage? They make money off of women exposing themselves and it's hard for me to fathom that she did not know who they were, nor what they were there intending to do.
Any conscious adult these days knows what GGW does. When they go to clubs/campuses/parties, it's not just one creepy dude with a camera, it's an entire entourage of people with logos and advertisements of exactly who they are. So, for her to say she didn't know what was going on amidst a sea of bare breasts seems a little off to me.
She did not say "no" to the filming, that is quite clear. There are nearly 24 seconds of her dancing, laughing, flirting with the camera and, unfortunately, her breasts are bared by a person other than the GGW crew. Why not then would you not expect them to use that footage? They make money off of women exposing themselves and it's hard for me to fathom that she did not know who they were, nor what they were there intending to do.
Any conscious adult these days knows what GGW does. When they go to clubs/campuses/parties, it's not just one creepy dude with a camera, it's an entire entourage of people with logos and advertisements of exactly who they are. So, for her to say she didn't know what was going on amidst a sea of bare breasts seems a little off to me.
