Google is staring down the barrel of a $100 million gun in form of a lawsuit, threatened by those whose photographs were ultimately compromised in the iCloud security breach that landed thousands of images on social networks, search engines, and everywhere else across the internet.

The company announced that they had already deleted “tens of thousands” of the inappropriate and leaked images of Jenifer Lawrence, Kim Kardashian, and many more Hollywood starlets.

However, the Attorney’s representing the Hollywood stars cites that the action didn’t happen quickly enough and that the company benefited financially from the leak. Marty Singer, the attorney in question, claimed that Google ignored initial requests to take the personal photos and data down, before actually beginning to afterward.

“Google has taken little or no action to stop these outrageous violations. Google is making millions and profiting from the victimizations of women,” Singer said in a letter written for a news outlet in Hollywood, describing the fight he would be taking to Google.

Many have contested that the leaked photographs are still on sites like Blogger, YouTube and even general Google searches, even though Google has said they’ve eliminated tens of thousands of photographs from their site and closed hundreds of accounts which were perpetuating the photographs.


Apple responded quickly and added security alerts to their iCloud service to protect against unwanted behavior or hacking – but hasn’t added any advanced security settings. The point is that right now, Google is the only company at the heart of this litigation attack, and that very-well could be, because there is little evidence to bring against anyone else.

If Google acted maliciously, or failed to remove the images as quickly as they could then clearly they will face a lot of litigation, and will potentially lose hundreds of millions in losses from the situation. However, it remains to be seen whether this is a matter of Google fundamentally failing to act, or acting maliciously to drive their bottom line – or if it’s simply a matter of litigation in an effort to assign blame for the breach and perpetuating of inappropriate, private photos.

The photos were originally released on 4Chan and went viral shortly thereafter last month after celebrities began confirming the legitimacy of the photos and verifying the breach.


  1. right. The original breach happens on Apple, but we go after Google for it. As if even Google had the ability to instantly stop the exponential multiplication of viral reposts.

    • Sounds crazy but Google is the one making money out of this. They have the ability to remove from their indexes any site making reference to it. Please Google don’t tell me is a manual process. Nobody is asking them to take the sites down only to remove them from their search indexes. If I was Google customer and see one of my adds on one of these searches I’d be mad as hell.

      • Hey dip, this has nothing to do with search results and site listings and every thing to do with google plus and google drive. As far as demanding google remove search results goes, that is putting the cart before the horse. If you want a link removed you need to establish that each link, individually, has broken the law or has content that was stolen. That means allowing the linked site a voice in the process. How do you know that some of the photos did not come from people these stars were engaged with and there by are acquired in a legal way.

    • I agree with you. I bet Google is in curing a Hugh cost to constantly monitor and delete these photos. If this was anyone else you would just learn not to do something as stupid as take sensitive material and let it on the cloud.
      If nothing else between this and JP Morgan, do you really thing trusting Apple with your credit card info is going to be any better? The criminals will just attack where the info is.

    • I say we try not to take nude photos on any device that is constantly connected to the internet. For heavens sake buy a camera. And if we choose to do this, how about setting up a great password so hackers can’t get into your account. Just an idea.

  2. Please, I believe most celebrities prayers are answered when their photos are hacked. Interest in them surges and their carrers get the boost they are hoping for.

    • It is the perfect scenario for them – they get to dodge the stigma of publishing their nude pics and still get the publicity of having their nude pics out there. It isn’t just female celebs either – same thing with a certain male rapper a while back. If he had posted it online himself he would have looked like he was egotistically pushing his junk in the internet’s collective face. But since it was leaked by someone else, the focus was on how well-hung he is. The lawsuit won’t get any money but it makes sure the leaked photos get publicized as widely as possible. Even publications that wouldn’t carry a story about nude celebrity photos will report on a $100m lawsuit against Google.

  3. So if I leave my door unlocked when I leave and someone steals something from my home, should I sue the home builder first, or the company who manufactured the doorlock? And don’t use a weak password if you have valuable stuff on your device. Like locking a screen door and expecting it to protect your home.

  4. i have a better idea, offer them the 100 million for the rights to display and distribute the photos freely. then they will back off.

  5. Those who say Google did not do enough are technically ignorant and relying on opinions from lawyers with dollar signs in their eyes. Go ahead and sue, but be prepared to be humiliated when Google brings days worth of testimony of all the efforts they executed.

    Deep pockets? Yes, and that means they can hire lawyers celebs can’t even afford to dream about. If Apple can’t afford lawyers to beat Google in court, what makes Jennifer Lawrence think she can? Google’s lawyers make more than she does.

    • Good luck with the torrents. How do you take down torrents? Every wanker from Asia to the Americas is passing bits and pieces of these images every second. Even if you remove the links to those torrents from Google’s search engine they are still found in the many torrent sites out there just as easily.

      Let’s for a second imagine these images were not posted to Google’s properties like Blogger and just the torrents, do you still think they will not be spread just as efficiently? Then who do you sue?

      This is definitely not the age of personal responsibility.

  6. So people understand that Google is only one of many search engines, right, and Google is not the internet? There is no way to stop anything from spreading online. Finding and downloading a single file containing all the images in question would be no issue for anyone wishing to do so, and Google would not be at all necessary to do it. Get real.

    • I think the main issue in the lawsuit is the instances of people uploading the images to Google services such as Blogger, rather than just links showing up in Google search.

  7. So when you really think about it, Google is getting sued because of apples hackable iCloud? I wouldn’t be surprised if apple was secretly behind this lawsuit.

  8. The “celebrities” are getting free publicity, which is what they wanted anyway. This is just greedy lawyers trying any dishonest tactic to line their own pockets. I hope they get SLAPPed down.

  9. Google should not be penalized for being a search engine. We are supposed to hold them responsible for every damn site they link to? Seriously. Actually feel a bit sorry for Google now.

  10. Most of em’ do their best to run around three quarters nude all day…then sue when the “unwashed masses” laugh at their plastic bodies. Kim K, she planted hers.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here