I find it hilarious that I know what her house looks like but don’t know a single one of her songs. Given that she wanted to hide the former and as an artist, probably wanted everyone to be exposed to the latter.
This may be generational. There is not likely to be much intersection between the group of people who listened to Streisand and those who listen to Swift.
It’s interesting to read that, now that we have more of a bird’s eye view of the whole situation. Streisand claims she never even wanted the image taken down, she just wanted her name removed from the image.
It’s pretty funny in retrospect, if removing her name was her goal, she probably could have made it happen if instead of filing a lawsuit, she just called the webmaster for that site and asked nicely.
Keep in mind this was 2003 when it was absolutely not the norm to be able to see the aerial view of any given celebrity’s house, which also tells a lot about layout and entry points.
Anytime i see a link to that article, i like to click over and take another look at that house. I like to think of it as doing my part keeping the Streisand effect strong.
Two years later, Masnick coined the name when writing about Marco Beach Ocean Resort’s takedown notice to urinal.net (a site dedicated to photographs of urinals) over its use of the resort’s name.
She was trying to have a picture of her house removed from a website. Link to wiki that contains the picture.
I find it hilarious that I know what her house looks like but don’t know a single one of her songs. Given that she wanted to hide the former and as an artist, probably wanted everyone to be exposed to the latter.
I grew up listening to her music because my parents liked it.
Now I also know that on a personal level she’s probably a whiny little bitch
A diva, even.
This may be generational. There is not likely to be much intersection between the group of people who listened to Streisand and those who listen to Swift.
To be fair I don’t listen to Swift either, but yes, I’m closer to her fans in age probably.
I’m somewhere in the middle. I am aware of both but really payed no attention to either.
It’s interesting to read that, now that we have more of a bird’s eye view of the whole situation. Streisand claims she never even wanted the image taken down, she just wanted her name removed from the image.
It’s pretty funny in retrospect, if removing her name was her goal, she probably could have made it happen if instead of filing a lawsuit, she just called the webmaster for that site and asked nicely.
If the picture were cropped to be just her house, it’s not even a particularly high resolution.
Keep in mind this was 2003 when it was absolutely not the norm to be able to see the aerial view of any given celebrity’s house, which also tells a lot about layout and entry points.
Anytime i see a link to that article, i like to click over and take another look at that house. I like to think of it as doing my part keeping the Streisand effect strong.
I guess that exists