It’s long been a pretty poorly kept secret in the fashion industry that many models are very thin–some dangerously so. For years, there’s been various debates in the industry over whether or not to make rules restricting the weight of models to ensure that the women (and men) showing off the latest high fashion designs are a healthy weight. Now France, one of the bastions of the fashion world, took a pretty strong step in that direction. A new French law prevents super-skinny models from being hired by designers and fashion houses. Industry members who do so may be subject to fines, or possibly even jail time.

The new law would essentially ban models who have a Body Mass Index (BMI) under 18. BMIs are calculated on a sort of sliding scale that takes into account an individual’s height and weight. The BMI then fits into one of a few different categories–including under healthy weight, healthy weight, overweight, and obese. However, doctors would also be consulted to ensure that the BMI test was being administered fairly, and to take into account the unique build and structure of the individual. Under a BMI of 18.5 is usually considered under healthy weight, and can be a marker to determine if someone has an eating disorder, such as anorexia or bulimia. There’s been an increased awareness brought to the problem of anorexia recently, particularly after the death of Isabelle Caro, a French fashion model who passed away most likely due to the disease in 2010.

An important aspect of the law to keep in mind is that it punishes the agencies or houses that hire the models, not the models themselves. This is to keep members of the industry from putting pressure on the models to lose weight, or stay at an unhealthy weight. As Dr. Oliver Véran, one of the legislators behind the bill put it, “a person should not be obliged to starve herself in order to work.”

France isn’t the first country to implement laws about the sizes of its fashion models. Other nations, such as Israel, Spain, and Italy have limited measures in place as well. However France’s seems to be the most sweeping. In France, punishments for employing a model who is below the healthy weight threshold could include a fine of up to 75,000 Euros ($82,000, under the current exchange rate), or up to six months of jail time.

Not everyone is on board with the new legislation however. Some think that the restrictions are too harsh, as well as too sweeping–they don’t allow as much ability to decide on an ad-hoc basis whether or not a model is healthy. That criticism includes the argument that just because a model has a BMI over the given level, does not mean that they are “healthy,” but could still be suffering from a debilitating eating disorder. Isabelle Saint-Felix, who heads up France’s National Union of Modeling Agencies stated:

When you look at the criteria behind anorexia, you can’t look only at the body mass index when other criteria are also involved: psychological, a history of hair loss, dental problems. It’s important that the models are healthy, but it’s a little simplistic to think there won’t be any more anorexics if we get rid of very thin models.

Overall, the recognition of possible dangerous attitudes in the modeling industry seems like a step in the right direction. That being said, there is clearly still more work to be done to ensure the fact that the models from the world’s top designers are healthy role models.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New French Law to Ban Models Below Healthy Weight appeared first on Law Street.

Model Mayhem is an online modeling site used by aspiring models to network, find jobs, and share photographs. It was just ruled that a lawsuit against it and its parent company, Internet Brands, Inc, will be allowed to move forward, after a young woman, Jane Doe, sued the site for negligence.

Jane Doe had been using Model Mayhem for its intended purpose — networking — when she was contacted to travel to Florida for an “audition.” There she met Lavont Flanders Jr. and Emerson Callum who drugged her, raped her, filmed the attack, and put it online, marketing it as “pornography.” Their plan was intrinsically tied to the ability to be able to use Model Mayhem to contact the aspiring models.

Flanders and Callum have since been convicted for their horrendous crimes in Florida court. Both of Miami, they stood trial in 2012. They were each found guilty of a hefty 12 consecutive life sentences for sex trafficking. Five of the victims were involved in Flanders and Callums’ trials, but it’s not clear whether the Jane Doe from the current suit was one of them.

According to Jane Doe’s suit, the site knew about Flander and Callums’ actions since 2010, but failed to disclose or provide any kind of warning to its users. The parent company, Internet Brands Inc, had sued the developers of Model Mayhem for failing to disclose that Flanders and Callums’ actions may lead to civil suits, something Internet Brands, Inc. claims should have been told to them when they purchased Model Mayhem in 2008.

What’s disturbing about that first suit is that Jane Doe was apprehended, sexually assaulted, and filmed in 2011. Which means that the website where her assailants found her knew that there was potential for something like this to happen for months before she was ever contacted. That’s not just terrifying — it’s certainly grounds for Jane Doe to argue negligence. And in the civil suit she filed against Internet Brands, Inc., that’s exactly what she argued.

She filed the suit originally in California, and the suit was dismissed under the Communications Decency Act, which was passed in the late 90s in an attempt to regulate the spread of internet-based pornography. On the most basic level, it attempts to make sure that children don’t see explicit content on the internet by regulating the ways in which sites are allowed to disseminate that kind of content. More relevantly to this case though, is Section 230, which states,

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

In lay terms, what that essentially means is that you can’t be sued if someone uses your website to, for example, distribute pornography.

This was the law that the original court used to overturn Jane Doe’s case. However, in an appeals ruling released this week, the decision was overturned. Judge Richard Clifton, of the Ninth Circuit, decided that Section 230 did not apply. He was part of a three-judge appellate court that decided the case can proceed. Clifton wrote that Jane Doe’s case isn’t barred under the act because,

Jane Doe’s claim is different, however. She does not seek to hold Internet Brands liable as a ‘publisher or speaker’ of content posted on the Model Mayhem website, or for Internet Brands’ failure to remove content posted on the website. Flanders and Callum are not alleged to have posted anything themselves.

The case will move forward, and with good reason. What Internet Brands Inc, did was reprehensible, and Jane Doe paid the price for its mistake. The company deserves to be held accountable, and this case is certain to make waves as it is indeed allowed to move forward.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Chris Jagers via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Case Against Online Modeling Site Involved in Rape to Move Forward appeared first on Law Street.