The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 5.14 The ProJared Problem, Ariana Grande Sued For Posting Photos Of Herself, & More

Starting point is 00:00:00 Sup you beautiful bastards, hope you're having a fantastic Tuesday. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco show and actually a quick note before we get started I saw some confusion this morning, which isn't crazy Sometimes you miss you know a 10-15 second announcement when I'm putting out 17 23 minute videos the past few weeks. Those solo deep dives that we've been doing that we've been posting in the mornings on Tuesday Wednesday Thursday, we are still doing those but we are now posting them at a kind of more reasonable time on Friday Saturday Sunday And so what that means is that on any given day, and I know a lot of you watch me kind of at the same time each day that you watch me,

Starting point is 00:00:29 there will be a brand new video on the channel. Monday through Thursday, a brand new Philip DeFranco show, and Friday through Sunday, you get a brand new solo deep dive. And I guess with that said, all that's left to say is hit that like button, otherwise I'm gonna punch you in the throat, and let's just jump into it.

Starting point is 00:00:42 The first thing we're gonna talk about today is some kind of weird, quickie legal news. We have Ariana Grande in the news because she is being sued for posting a photo of herself. And more specifically, these photos were taken by Robert Barbera, who's a New York-based photographer who snapped the photos when Grande exited a building carrying a bag that said the name of her album, Sweetener.

Starting point is 00:00:58 Because Ariana Grande did not have Barbera's permission to post the photos that he took, he feels that he deserves compensation for their use. And according to the complaint, Grande infringed Barbera's copyright in the photographs by reproducing and publicly displaying the photographs on the Instagram page. Grande is not and has never been licensed

Starting point is 00:01:11 or otherwise authorized to reproduce, publicly display, distribute, and or use the photographs. And Barbera is seeking the profits earned from the photos or between $2,500 and $25,000 in damages for each photo. Which, that photo has been taken down from Instagram, but according to screenshots, not before it got at least 3.3 million likes. But ultimately, now we're gonna have to wait to see

Starting point is 00:01:28 if Grande is going to respond, if this goes to court. But what was really interesting to me is this is not an entirely unique situation. In fact, a lot of other celebrities have faced similar lawsuits. Most recently, back in January, Gigi Hadid was sued for copyright infringement for posting a photo of herself. Last year, you had JLo being sued

Starting point is 00:01:42 for sharing a paparazzi photo of herself on her Instagram story. You had Jessica Simpson that same year, Khloe Kardashian back in 2017. Hell, 50 Cent was also sued that same year for posting two photos that were taken at one of his concerts. Yeah, I thought it was really interesting and I really want to know your thoughts on this. Do you feel like because Ariana Grande is the subject of the photo, or let's say you were the subject of a photo, you should automatically have some rights to it because you are the subject, you're being used? Or do you think, no, that the

Starting point is 00:02:05 the photograph or maybe let's say video, it is the creation of the person behind the camera? Or is there some middle ground here? Any and all thoughts, I'd love to hear from you. Then, in a kind of quickie update, as promised last month, actress Felicity Huffman has now pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. And that is because Huffman admitted to paying $15,000 to have her daughter's SAT scores boosted, and she also says that her daughter knew nothing of the scheme. As far as what kind of punishment she's facing, that conspiracy charge carries a maximum sentence

Starting point is 00:02:31 of up to 20 years in prison. But prosecutors are recommending a four-month prison term, a $20,000 fine, and 12 months of supervised release. As far as what she'll actually get, Huffman's sentencing isn't scheduled to take place until September 13th. But yeah, ultimately she is the latest to be taken down by Operation Varsity Blues,

Starting point is 00:02:46 which of course involved 50 people being charged. I will also say, if Huffman's telling the truth, I really feel bad for her daughter. Because you know that even if it's true, there's a great number of people that won't believe that. They'll think that she was probably part of it. But yeah, another one goes down. And then let's talk about this story

Starting point is 00:02:59 that involves the Supreme Court, because wow. Yesterday, the Supreme Court overturned a previous judgment and ruled that iPhone users are actually free to sue Apple over the company's total control and monopoly on apps. And this ruling is a long time in the making, with the original case actually dating back to December 2011. And that was when just four iPhone users

Starting point is 00:03:16 filed a class action lawsuit against Apple. And in that complaint, they state that the company had, quote, unlawfully stifled competition, reduced output and consumer choice, and artificially increased prices in the after markets. And so basically what they were saying is because there's only one place for iPhone users to get apps, Apple had created a monopoly in the market. And they further complained that additional charges like the 30% commission from Apple increased prices of the apps.

Starting point is 00:03:36 Now on the other side of this, Apple argued back, citing the 1977 Illinois Brick Doctrine. Which I won't explain what that is because everyone knows about the Illinois Brick Doctrine. Actually, I don't want to be lost the 1977 Illinois brick doctrine found that customers couldn't sue the brick company because they were purchasing from middlemen meaning that only the direct purchaser the middlemen Who were mostly Masons were the only ones that could actually pursue an antitrust lawsuit And so Apple argued that in this case they act as the middlemen for developers were the ones that set the prices So they were arguing that the app developers are not the consumers would be the only ones able to bring an antitrust lawsuit against Apple. And so if you were a customer,

Starting point is 00:04:07 you had issues with the app costs, they should be taken up with the developers. Then what we saw two years later, December 2013, the US District Court in Northern California ruled in the favor of Apple and dismissed the complaint, essentially closing the case. But those iPhone users were not done fighting and they spent the next four years

Starting point is 00:04:20 trying to appeal the decision. Ultimately bringing it to the Supreme Court in August of 2017 and then finally, yesterday we got the judgment. And the decision. Ultimately bringing it to the Supreme Court in August of 2017, and then finally, yesterday we got the judgment. And the decision came down to a five to four vote, and many were actually surprised by this because Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who is normally more on the conservative side,

Starting point is 00:04:34 was the deciding vote. And as for the reasoning of his vote, Kavanaugh wrote, "'The plaintiffs purchase apps directly from Apple "'and therefore are direct purchasers under Illinois Brick.'" Now it is very important to note here, however, that the Supreme Court did not rule directly on the case from 2011. As of now, it only allows the original plaintiffs

Starting point is 00:04:48 to have the right and standings to sue Apple if they so choose. And in a statement, Apple responded to yesterday's judgment saying, "'We are confident we will prevail "'when the facts are presented "'and that the App Store is not a monopoly by any metric. "'We are proud to have created the safest,

Starting point is 00:04:59 "'most secure and trusted platform for customers "'and a great business opportunity "'for all developers around the world. "'Developers set the price they want to charge for their app and Apple has no role in that. And adding the vast majority of apps on the app store are free and Apple gets nothing from them. The only instance where Apple shares in revenue

Starting point is 00:05:13 is if the developer chooses to sell digital services through the app store. But still, I think it is incredibly important to understand that while yesterday's decision involved just the original plaintiffs, yesterday's ruling is a big deal for tech companies because it allows more consumers the opportunity to pursue legal actions,

Starting point is 00:05:26 and so you have some tech companies that are worried. Big name tech guys like Amazon and Google have voiced their concern that this decision will open the floodgates of very pricey and lengthy lawsuits. You saw Edward Black, the CEO of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, which is a non-profit organization for tech industry,

Starting point is 00:05:40 saying that the ruling's worried him, saying, we are concerned that the outcome of this ruling expands a previous ruling, Illinois Bricks, and increases liability risks for multi-sided business models. And adding the decision may unintentionally expose businesses offering digital platform services to unintended liability. And now knowing where the Supreme Court lands on this, I mean that changes the landscape. But like with everything that we talked about, there's the story and of course now I'd love to hear from you. What are your thoughts on this? Do you think the Apple App Store is a monopoly? Do you feel like the consumers do have the right

Starting point is 00:06:05 to sue Apple here or no? Do you think it ultimately falls on the developer? Any and all thoughts, I'd be really interested to hear from you. Then let's talk about one of the most requested stories from over the weekend are these serious allegations around YouTuber ProJared. And if you don't know ProJared or Jared Knobbenbauer,

Starting point is 00:06:18 he was a popular gamer who was recently accused of sending and soliciting sexually explicit pictures from his fans, including at least two people who were underage. And there's a lot of moving parts to this story, so we're gonna try and break it down. The allegations first came out on Wednesday when ProJared announced in a statement on Twitter that he was divorcing his wife, cosplayer Heidi O'Farrell.

Starting point is 00:06:34 But it turns out it wasn't that simple, because then O'Farrell responds out in a series of tweets accusing ProJared not only of cheating, but engaging in abusive behavior towards her. Things like gaslighting her, blaming her for problems in their relationship, isolating her from her friends by portraying her as, quote, randomly angry and upset all the time

Starting point is 00:06:48 for no reason at all, but saying it's because he's abusing me. But of course that was only the start of it because then in a separate post O'Farrell said, "'It's also true that he has been soliciting nudes "'from his fans for years. "'I was there. "'In the beginning it was a joke on Tumblr.

Starting point is 00:06:59 "'Then it was its own Tumblr account just for nudes. "'It was ostensibly a body positive space "'for consenting adults and I approved on that basis. But then she said it started to escalate and she concluded the thread writing, "'I used to think that among consenting adults it was fine. "'Now I see it as an abuse of power "'for him to intentionally manipulate anyone

Starting point is 00:07:14 "'to show him their naked body on the basis "'that he's a popular internet man. "'I would like to apologize for my role in enabling this.'" And after O'Farrill's post, we just saw the internet explode. We saw people start coming forward, sharing their experiences of exchanging or receiving explicit pictures with ProJared, with some saying that he would often send them

Starting point is 00:07:29 explicit pictures that were unsolicited or unprompted. And at least two of the people that came forward to share their stories claim that they were underage at the time of their interactions with him. One fan who goes by Chai, posting a statement on Twitter, writing, "'ProJared sexually manipulated me via Tumblr "'when I was 16,' continuing,

Starting point is 00:07:42 "'I sent him many actual real nudes,' "'and adding, he knew I was 16.' Continuing, I sent him many actual real nudes and adding he knew I was 16. He also said that he sent lewd pictures to ProJared's blog with the explicit instruction, "'Do not post this online, I'm 16' saying he posted them anyway. Shortly after that, we saw another allegation. This person was also mentioned by Chai

Starting point is 00:07:58 saying that that person was underage and they shared their alleged experience with ProJared. And in the post, that person who goes by Charlie wrote, "'When I was around the same age as Chai, 15, 16, "'I was a really, really big fan of ProJared. "'I thought it was funny when he posted "'all the send nudes things on Tumblr. "'It was just a joke at first, then it quickly escalated.'"

Starting point is 00:08:14 Continuing, Jared is a grown man. I'm sure he understands that a significant chunk of his audience are middle and high schoolers. An open invitation to send him nudes is oddly predatory, especially when there is a risk for minors, again, a good portion of his following sending you nudes. Charlie also said that they eventually sent naked photos to ProJared writing,

Starting point is 00:08:30 "'He messaged me and thanked me "'and told me how he was beautiful,' and then adding, "'I don't think he ever asked for my age.'" And since Chai and Charlie made their statements, others have come forward to talk about the not-safe-for-work Tumblr blog ProJared created to send and share explicit pictures with his fans.

Starting point is 00:08:41 We spoke with a Twitter user who goes by Bren, who told us they never interacted with ProJared personally, but described themselves as a witness to the blog. Bren saying they found ProJared's blog in a group chat for a game, writing, "'I remember that a handful of people in the group chat "'were into the blog, many were minors.'" Bren then described ProJared's blog, writing,

Starting point is 00:08:56 "'I would say that him creating the whole blog "'was incredibly manipulative. "'His fan base was made up of so many underage fans.'" Bren also told us something else that Jared would do on the blog is talk in an infantilizing manner, calling people who submitted nudes to him his sinners. Adding, two adults wouldn't say they're sinning when sharing nudes, but a teenager who hasn't had

Starting point is 00:09:11 the chance to explore their sexuality might have that view. Even going on to call it essentially grooming a whole group of fans. And Brian's experience was also echoed by a person who goes by Asa, who told the Daily Beast about their experience messaging pro-Jared, saying, "'I was freshly 18 and I had absolutely no romantic "'or sexual experiences.' "'He saying, I was freshly 18 and I had absolutely no romantic or sexual experiences. He asked if I was over 18 and I said yes, mentioning that my birthday was scarcely a few months prior.

Starting point is 00:09:30 He said that he was honored, I would want to use my newfound legality with him. Isa also said that it was quote, barely a secret that underage people were interacting with pro-Jared's blog, and adding, I know a few of my friends had taken their ages off their page so that Jared couldn't verify that they were under 18. Brian also reportedly confirmed that Jared threatened to block followers from his private Tumblr if their bios showed that they were underage, and adding, obviously this wouldn't keep all minors out of it, but at least he was doing that. Now once these allegations started coming out, ProJared immediately started receiving backlash. According to Social Blade, ProJared's YouTube account lost more than 100,000 subscribers

Starting point is 00:09:59 in the first 24 hours after the allegations came out alone, and since then he's actually lost a total of 200,000 followers. We've also seen other gamers and creators distancing themselves from him. We also saw the creator collective ProJared belongs to Normal Boots responding to the accusations in a statement on Twitter, saying that they'd received an unsolicited email

Starting point is 00:10:13 on April 4th that contained allegations of inappropriate conduct pertaining to Jared. And that statement goes on to say that they have investigated the allegations and had planned to terminate their relationship with ProJared before the allegations were made public. But also said that ProJared and the collective have since mutually agreed to part ways. And in a Twitter post, Chai said that he and Charlie had sent the email to Normal Boots and shared a screenshot of the email

Starting point is 00:10:31 the two received from them. And so ultimately that is where we are right now. As of recording this video, ProJared has not publicly said anything about the situation at all. And really the only thing we saw after he made that statement about the divorce was he tweeted, I won't be able to make it to the dissent this year, I hope everyone attending has a great time. And so with all of that said, I pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts around all of this? You know, I've seen some people out there saying, you know, we haven't heard Jared's side of this. Maybe there's something else.

Starting point is 00:10:52 Although I will say, it seemed like a lot of those responses were more about the cheating and the relationship with the, I guess, the now ex-wife. And seemingly less so with the fan and underage fan aspect of this. I don't know, just any and all thoughts. I just want to get past this story, man. It just makes me uncomfortable.

Starting point is 00:11:06 And that's where we're going to end today's show. And remember, if you like this video, you wanna support the channel, just take a second, hit that like button, maybe even share it with friends, family. Also, if you're new here and you wanna make sure you don't miss any of our daily videos, be sure to hit that subscribe button.

Starting point is 00:11:17 Also, if you're not 100% filled in, maybe you missed one of the last two videos, you can click or tap right there to watch those, or just go to roguerocket.com. But with that said, of course, as always, my name is Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in I love yo faces, and I'll see you tomorrow

Your Ad Here

The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 5.14 The ProJared Problem, Ariana Grande Sued For Posting Photos Of Herself, & More

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.