Cicarelli Assets Still Hanging Out Online

The star, formerly under contract to Warner Bros. partner SBT television, appears in the independent production “How To Stuff a Wild Bikini.” But the real jerk here is not the bimbo. It’s the himbo.

[Update, 1-15-07: Many Cicarelli bashers and brainless scandal-mongering horndogs are pouring onto my post in search of the dirt on the dastardly MTV diva.

But none of this is principally her fault.

And see here for the real scoop on what went down at that São Paulo court. --Ed.]

The G1 news portal now reports that Justiça “esquece” outro site do Google e mantém Cicarelli na web –

Court ‘forgets about’ Google’s other video hosting and keeps Cicarelli up on the Web.

Seems like kind of a loaded way of putting it.

And why is that phrase in quotes in the headline, if you are not going to attribute that word to a source, anyway?

Seems kind of like editorializing to me, that practice.

Especially since the notion that the court “ordered ISPs to block YouTube.com” is a controversial proposition.

Because the court itself said that it ordered no such thing.

Does Globo not compete with Google, in some sense?

Why else would G1 start offering news alerts, as Google News Brasil also recently started doing?

And should it not disclose that in its reporting?

Hey, just throwing it out.

A big point in its favor, however, is that G1 publishes the entire text of the court order in question.

[UPDATE: Or does it? No, no, wait: It does not. Subtract all points and assign penalty.]

Which means that it should know better, or at least try to explain, based on the language in that document, why the Court is wrong about what the Court itself insists it thinks it decided.

A Justiça brasileira obrigou empresas de telecomunicações a bloquear o acesso ao site de vídeos YouTube, mas “se esqueceu” do serviço on-line Google Video. As duas páginas são da mesma empresa — o gigante das buscas Google –, oferecem exatamente o mesmo serviço, têm estrutura bastante parecida e divulgam as imagens picantes de Daniella Cicarelli com seu namorado, Renato Malzoni Filho, em um uma praia espanhola. A assessoria de imprensa do Google não comenta o caso.

… The two pages are owned by the same firm, have a very similar structure and are both publishing the spicy pictures in question … Google public relations has no comment.

That, I would say, is not entirely true, as to “a very similar structure.”

Have you ever read the boilerplate and tried to dissect the posting process when posting to Google Video?

It is a lot more elaborate than merely checking the “I swear on my mother’s eyes that I have the right to post this content and assume all liability if I lie” disclaimer on the old YouTube.

Na segunda-feira (08), antes do bloqueio, a reportagem do G1 conseguiu localizar no YouTube diversos desses arquivos — alguns identificados com o nome da modelo, enquanto outros estavam “disfarçados”. Nesta terça (09), em poucos segundos, foi possível encontrar o mesmo conteúdo no Google Video. Além de estar disponível nos dois serviços da empresa de buscas, o material aparece em outras páginas e sites pornográficos da internet — está lá, para quem quiser ver.

G1 reporters, the story says, were able to find copies of the video on Google Video within seconds.

Not a big surprise, that.

But presumably the legalese that conditions its presence on Google Video will make trying to get it removed a much different proposition.

An easier proposition, even — one not requiring all the operatic “ambiguities” (ahem) that allegedly permit monopoly-seeking Brazilian ISPs that are also content providers to black out a major competitor in the content-provider portion of their market and shafting the entire user base in order to remove one offending piece of content.

That is my guess.