You may remember that back in October, an unnamed actress sued IMDB for revealing her age, which she said she had deliberately kept hidden, saying IMDB obtained it from her credit card information and published it without her permission. At the time, a number of gossip sites posted their usual, idiotic blind-item stories where they speculated wildly on the identity of the plaintiff, but they weren’t even close. This despite the answer being right underneath their noses! It turns out it was that household name Junie Hoang (right), whom you may remember from such films as Gingerdead Man 3: Saturday Night Cleaver, and Hoodrats 2: Hoodrat Warrior. (*updates Netflix queue*)

IMDB, who seem like giant dicks, filed a motion to dismiss the case last month unless the actress revealed herself, and won.

In a sharply-worded decision, U.S. District Court Judge Marsha Pechman found that while the anonymous actress who sued for $1 million fears blacklisting and other retribution in Hollywood if her true identity is known, “the injury she fears is not severe enough to justify permitting her to proceed anonymously,” the ruling states.

Judge Pechman gave the woman who sued as “Jane Doe” 14 days to refile the case under her own name or it will be dismissed.  [THR]

Read the rest of this entry »

I will never stop enjoying using this picture to go with this story.

About a month ago, an unnamed actress anonymously sued IMDB for revealing her age, which she says they obtained through her credit card information and posted without her permission, saying revealing their age without permission puts actresses pushing 40 at a disadvantage in trying to get roles if they can pass for younger. Which is true, I’m sure it sucks trying to live long enough for your ironic, Betty White fame. Anyway, this week, IMDB fired back, and it was basically the legal and public statement equivalent of a dismissive wanking motion. IMDB AIN’T CARE!

Amazon.com, owner of iMDb, believes it knows the identity of this woman, and it tells a Washington federal court that before she filed the lawsuit, she first tried to get the service to post a false birthdate so she could fool potential Hollywood employers into thinking she was younger than she actually is. Now a judge is being asked to dismiss the lawsuit so as to not perpetuate a fraud on the public.
In its motion to dismiss filed last week and obtained by THR, the company questions whether the judicial system should be used to help an actress hide her 40 years of age. According to IMDb:
“Truth and justice are philosophical pillars of this Court. The perpetuation of fraud, even for an actor’s career, is inconsistent with these principals. Plaintiff’s attempt to manipulate the federal court system so she can censor iMDb’s display of her birth date and pretend to the world that she is not 40 years old is selfish, contrary to the public interest and a frivolous abuse of this Court’s resources.”
The judge is being asked to dismiss the case because the original lawsuit was an alleged violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a). IMDb believes the plaintiff has no proper reason to file her case anonymously, so the company is attempting to get the case dismissed if the woman doesn’t step forward to reveal herself. [THR]

Look, no one’s arguing that aging actresses aren’t all dangerous amoral sociopaths who should be locked up as a preventative measure like the wolfman. I mean, I think we’ve all seen the Real Housewives. But IMDB’s whole statement just seems like a diversionary tactic. You either revealed someone’s age without her permission or you didn’t. If it was naked pictures, I could see, those are for everyone, but otherwise that’s just wrong.

"Hello, I'm here to read for the role of Edward Cullen."

In the wake of the unnamed actress suing IMDb for revealing her true age, the two major actors guilds have also fired a shot at the website. From a joint statement by SAG and AFTRA:

“Screen Actors Guild and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists strongly believe that businesses like IMDb have a moral and legal obligation not to facilitate age discrimination in employment,” said the guilds. “Entertainment industry employers who would never directly ask a potential employee’s age routinely access that information through IMDb and its professional subscription site IMDbPro. IMDb has the power to remove the temptation for employers to engage in age discrimination by accessing this information.”

”IMDb publishes the actual dates of birth of thousands of actors without their consent, most of them not celebrities but rank-and-file actors whose names are unknown to the general public,” they said. “When their actual ages then become known to casting personnel, the 10+ year age range that many of them can portray suddenly shrinks, and so do their opportunities to work.”

In order to understand what’s going on here, I think it’s important to look at this issue from both perspectives. One one hand, it must be incredibly tough to be a 45-year-old actress. Outside of like three roles a decade (all given to Sandra Bullock), Hollywood tends to pin women into two categories: “young hot starlet” or “spinster/Mom.” Obviously, the former pays better and gives you the chance extend your career in a cutthroat industry. On the other hand, as long as IMDb keeps doing this, the two sides will keep fighting about it and it will give me a chance to post banner pics where I pretend Abe Vigoda is reading for roles in teen movies, which is HILARIOUS to me.

So, yeah, both sides make some pretty valid points.

"No, seriously, no cables, not even an antenna! Have you seen this? Have you heard of this? I don't know where it came from, but this nice Mexican girl gave it to me. She's pretty, but I think she might be a witch."

Word up, hepcats, peep this excerpt from a recent interview with Woody Allen:

Reuters: You still write your scripts on a typewriter?

Allen: I don’t own a word processor; I am not a gadget person.

Reuters: So how do you adapt to the world of iPods and iPads?

Allen: I have a telephone, a cell phone, but all I can do on it is call out and receive calls. I don’t have any other use, I have no, what do you call it, text number? [source]

A “text number?”  Jesus, man, is that some Jitterbug scheme to get old people to buy two phones?  I also like how he casually refers to “word processors” as if they’re the latest in gadgetry.  I’m old enough to remember jerking off before the internet (in college!) and even I barely know what that is.  I imagine him looking at the reporter’s microphone going “Can it hear me? Do I need to get closer to the machine?”  Which I suppose makes it all the more impressive that his latest movie is actually pretty friggin good. I should show him the email forward with all those “amazing real pictures” my mom keeps sending me.  “Good heavens! I can’t believe the shark ate that helicopter,” I imagine he’d say.

[thanks to the ancient Matt Ufford for the tip]

Back in the 20s and 30s, you didn’t need the crusty old MPAA to tell you your Danish space-docking film was too hot for The Disney Channel.  Instead, local censor boards simply took your film and cut out the frames they thought were naughty.  This is a compilation of just some of those censored images, which gives us a fun look into what our grandparents found offensive and/or hot enough to whack off to.  The scintillation includes but isn’t limited to: bustacious skanks in bathing suits, lingering shots of feet (Tarantino would be proud), and a lady whose dress blows up to reveal, ooh la la, an entire other dress underneath.  Sex-eee.

If anything, this shows just how far we’ve come as a society.  I’m grateful to live in a time where my grandpa is now free to masturbate to whatever he chooses.  Which in his case are mostly Miley Cyrus videos.  He loves that little snaggle-toothed hillbilly.

[via Neatorama]