« The Sigma DP2 Merrill and B&W | Main | Open Mike: Moving TOP to a New Home »

Sunday, 23 March 2014


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I refuse to click on any link for any story that promises to be; jaw dropping, mind blowing, or SHOCKING.

It's really quite interesting. And of course, being topless (for males and females) is completely legal in NYC.

BTW, it's the model who was topless, not the photographer.

So... a photographer who doesn't read your blog ("TOPless") is litigious? Somehow I'm not surprised. If said photog read this blog, they'd be much less prone to histrionics, methinks.

You don't want to know how the photographer is lost now that the Empire State Building is blocking access to TOP?

A topless photographer would be someone who does not visit this site. Easy to figure out without following the link.

This post is just plain mean.

You should have clicked. It's quite a funny story.

The kind of weather the east coast has been having I think the model should get the $5 million.

They said he was a veteran, well there goes that better to ask forgiveness then permission mantra a lot of my former military veteran friends have.

Dear Mike,

A terribly amusing article, but it strikes me as a good object lesson in corporate PR, under the heading of “Don't do this!”

When you're in the business of making money off of public relations, as a major tourist site is, there are a couple of things you should learn early on. The first is don't get involved in controversy. The second is don't make enemies.

It is one thing to take measures (of which there are many) to ensure that unwanted activities don't occur on your private property. There are many sensible ways to do that. This is not one of them. Trying to make an example of someone when there is not actually a direct threat to the income stream, the safety of the facility, or the safety and well-being of people there is a really bad PR move.

pax \ Ctein
[ Please excuse any word-salad. MacSpeech in training! ]
-- Ctein's Online Gallery http://ctein.com 
-- Digital Restorations http://photo-repair.com 

we were just there, a week ago. there were no topless anyones! it was low 40's with a 20mph wind! there are no benches inside and security kept coming through and making people who were sitting on the floor get up!

+1 to Ctein's post. The only reason the vast majority of the public know about this incident is the news around the lawsuit. If the ESB PR folks were really concerned about reputation, this was exactly the wrong move.

NY's top court, the Court of Appeals, says that women going topless in public is constitutionally protected,as men can do the same. That was in a criminal prosecution. So, this lawsuit is based on what? Some kind of rules list posted on a wall or the back of a ticket? First, defining the conduct in an actionable way probably not found in the contract. Even if some sort of breach of contract occurred, one still has to prove damages? Free publicity for the EST and the photog? Everybody is a winner. My bet is no more is heard of this alleged lawsuit.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007