Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Posts
    898

    E-mail From: Jennifer Aniston

    My wife forwarded an e-mail she got from a friend a few minutes ago. Although it might be fake the pictures attached to the e-mail seem real.

    > >-----Original Message-----

    > >From: Jennifer Aniston

    > >Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 12:32 PM

    > >To: Prasertlum, Jeff

    > >Subject: FW: Friends in town

    > >

    > >Jeff,

    > >Here are some pic's of that Christening that I went to, that I was

    > >telling you about...
    Pictures attached:
    <removed>
    Last edited by MattF; 04-21-2005 at 06:08 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Leicester, UK
    Posts
    1,531
    Oh Dear, shes starting to look old :p

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Fairfax, Virginia
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: E-mail From: Jennifer Aniston

    [QUOTE]Originally posted by eMax
    [B]My wife forwarded an e-mail she got from a friend a few minutes ago. Although it might be fake the pictures attached to the e-mail seem real.





    Why would your wife's friend get such an e-mail? Does her name sound like a celebrity's? It might be a hoax... were the pictures at a website that you had to click on or something?

    That's pretty odd though. I don't know what to say; it could be real, it could be fake.
    Last edited by MattF; 04-21-2005 at 06:12 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Posts
    898
    Nope, they were attached to the e-mail, no links to any sites what so ever.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    393
    *searches Jennifer Aniston on google*

    old indeed, but she still has it

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Fairfax, Virginia
    Posts
    6,835
    Originally posted by eMax
    Nope, they were attached to the e-mail, no links to any sites what so ever.
    Hmm... what e-mail address was the sender, if you don't mind sharing?

    Originally posted by arxor
    *searches Jennifer Aniston on google*

    old indeed, but she still has it
    I agree. She doesn't look bad at all.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Posts
    898
    lol, I can't just give the senders e-mail address out...Anyways I figure it would be a good thread for those who like Jennifer.

    And who knows, it might be real. My wife, because she is in real estate, gets a lot of e-mail from many associates across the country.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Reading, England
    Posts
    4,243

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Posts
    898
    good find...well there yeah go, it's so called real (kinda). At least my wife felt special for awhile. Now I get to break the news ...Heck she flipped out when she read the story that tupac was alive. Never dawned on her it was April 1st when she read the story.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Kuwait
    Posts
    10,573
    Originally posted by Vortex-Steve
    http://www.sky.com/showbiz/article/0...178863,00.html
    good find



    man rumors travel like lightning over the net
    Bashar Al-Abdulhadi - KuwaitNET Internet Services Serving customers since 1997
    Kuwait's First Webhosting and Domain Registration provider - an ICANN Accredited Registrar

    Twitter: Bashar Al-Abdulhadi

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    986
    Wow. Copyright infringement though? Did they actually go out there and get their baby's pictures copyrighted?

    Of all the things these actors will do publicly, why are baby pictures such a private issue? Sooner or later someone with too much time on their hands is see the kid for themselves and take some pictures of their own, and it's all over. It seems so ridiculous it almost sounds like a pre-concieved publicity stunt.
    Corey Northcutt | Northcutt
    Competitive inbound marketing with a hosting industry competency.
    Social | Content | Optimization | Outreach

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    749

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Fairfax, Virginia
    Posts
    6,835
    Originally posted by qwidjib0
    Wow. Copyright infringement though? Did they actually go out there and get their baby's pictures copyrighted?

    Of all the things these actors will do publicly, why are baby pictures such a private issue? Sooner or later someone with too much time on their hands is see the kid for themselves and take some pictures of their own, and it's all over. It seems so ridiculous it almost sounds like a pre-concieved publicity stunt.
    Have you heard of intellectual property?

  14. #14
    They look pretty realistic to me

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,607
    You might want to take the links off...

    I heard on the tv, that they're looking to sue anyone that publishes the photos online.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Duluth MN
    Posts
    3,864
    That and you legally need the explicit permission of the parents to have images of a child released to the public.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    chica go go
    Posts
    11,858
    Honestly, who cares? The email didn't come from jennifer, and there are lots of better looking paparazzi-taken photos out there.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    24,009
    Originally posted by rockergrrl
    You might want to take the links off...

    I heard on the tv, that they're looking to sue anyone that publishes the photos online.
    Probably because this is killing the million dollar media deal they most probably have for publishing the baby pics in a magazine.

    IMO, this is not about invasion of privacy for their new born baby. This is more about losing big $$$$, by not having an exclusive on the pics, if they're circulating on the net, and being reported about by various media.

    They would have signed an exclusive deal with some media, giving them exclusive rights to publish the baby pics. Basically what's happened now is that the pics have got out there, and that media deal would be dead in the water, or greatly diluted.

    Of course what's making this whole things worse is the media reporting on the leaking of the pics, thus giving the leaked pics more exposure.
    AussieHost.com Aussie Bob, host since 2001
    Host Multiple Domains on Fast Australian Servers!!

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    localhost
    Posts
    3,510
    Removed, I don't see any point to leave them for any longer, it has been discussed, the email is not legitmate, and the family for whatever reasons doesn't want the pics of the event distributed, got to respect their right to request privacy for whatever reason, deserved or not. I'm sure you can google for them if you really want to see.
    MattF - Since the start..

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Posts
    898
    WOW...I really wasn't thinking a simple thread with a few pictures would turn all serious and controversy BUT leave it up to WHT to bring the edge into something such as this...



  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    60
    I agree with Aussie Bob, that's lot of money we are talking about here...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •