This is pathetic.
Hilton's suit alleged that the website — parisexposed.com — which displays photos, home videos, diary entries and audiotapes of her conversations, as well as images of her passport, is "one of the most reprehensible invasions of privacy of a celebrity."
"Privacy of a celebrity"? Isn't that a bit of a catch-22, Pari?
Hilton claimed the removal company was supposed to pay the storage fees and that she was "shocked and surprised" to learn that the amount had not been paid and that her belongings had been sold at a public auction.
Ha! Even disgustingly rich oxygen-wasters hire shonky storage companies. Except, you know, they can sue when stuff goes wrong.
"I was appalled to learn that people are exploiting my and my sisters' private personal belongings for commercial gain," she said in her court statement.
Really? I don't know if you've noticed but it's been going on for years. And is it any worse than exposing your private, personal, genitals for commercial gain? You've shown numerous times you have no problem with that.
The simple fact of the matter is that Paris Hilton, for whatever reason, is one of the largest industries in America at the moment. Why should it only be the Hiltons themselves who profit? If you believe in Free Enterprise, every man, woman and child has the right to make money from a dumb whore if that's where the cash is.
Hilton is seeking closure of the site on the grounds that the information shown could be used by people "to steal my identity, or even worse, to harass or stalk me."
This is pretty pathetic grounds. Identity theft? Right. That makes sense. Who knows what Paris Hilton looks like? They'll only recognise you when you're in low-resolution video taking it up the arse. But honestly, the idea that any half-good-looking blond could flash a Hilton ID and get passed off at her is ludicrous. The average blond I've seen is far too good-looking.
And harass/stalk? HOW WOULD YOU EVEN KNOW? You're surrounded by PR/Security entourages constantly! When do you talk to plebs? And I have news for you - if you're stalker-bait (and, frankly, there's no doubt about it seeing as every grass-munching fool is obsessed with your skankitude) the stalkers are already there. See, notice is given in advance where you're going to show up, because the organisers have to pay a million dollars to have you show up. And if someone tries to figure out your routine away from paid visits to charity events it'll be easy. Seeing as everytime you get out of a fucking car door there's someone to take a photo, your underwear-less freak!
The lawsuit claims the possessions were bought by defendants Nabil and Nabila Haniss for 2,775 dollars and sold to a third person Bardia Persa, for 10 million. Visitors to the site pay around 40 dollars to view the items.
What can I say? Fair exchange is no robbery. It may be completely idiotic and unfair, but there's nothing illegal about that.
In addition to claiming invasion of privacy, Hilton says she filed copyright registrations last week for three writings that were contained in the belongings. She claims the site is engaging in copyright infringement.
I find the idea of her 'writings' amusing. Personally I like to believe it's some sort of Bratz fanfic.
In case you haven't worked it out I really hate her. Seacrest out.