I think scale matters, as does motivation. As a general rule I don't give a crap about celebrity nude photos, but I do care about international hacking attacks.
For those that haven't been paying attention what happened was Sony made a stoner/slacker style comedy about a couple of Journalists recruited to whack Kim Jong Un called "The Interview". Not really a big deal since nations in conflict produce this kind of stuff all the time at various levels. During "The Cold War" the USSR had a communist version of Star Trek the name of which translates roughly into "Cosmos Militia" or "Cosmos Patrol" (http://www.stim.com/Stim-x/0996September/Automedia/soviet.html for more basic information), and while harder to point a finger at there have been plenty of things like that produced by all countries, albeit not always at the level of TV shows and movies. Every once in a while you see travelling displays by groups like "The Smithsonian" that show off collections of anti-US propaganda. What's more certain movies like "Inglorious Basterds" are in part based around the idea of media warfare. North Korea itself has produced videos (some of which have shown up on the internet to much mockery if I recall) mocking the US and it's policies, and Kim Jong Un seems to threaten the US every other Thursday. What's more despite an armistice we're still technically at war with these guys I believe. I spend so much time pointing this out because it seems some people are oblivious to this reality or for some reason seem to try and lionize North Korea. Ironically the trend of the US being one of the only nations that deeply criticizes and insults itself continues.
At any rate what happened was a group of hackers attacked Sony and released all of this information and said it was because of this movie. What's more terrorist threats were issued saying that theaters would be attacked if they showed the film, causing most mainstream theater chains to refuse to carry it. This being a direct threat to free speech due to people being silenced due to the threat of violence. Obama himself said that the attack was traced back to North Korea, and that theaters refusing to show the movie was a mistake, he also said there would be retaliation... before promptly going on another vacation. http://www.mercurynews.com/portal/crime-courts/ci_27169802/sony-hack-adds-security-pressure-companies?_loopback=1 ... there are LOTS of stories about this, this is just a sample.
At any rate while there are a lot of peace at any price liberals who push this being some kind of promotional attempt by Sony, and even supporting the North Korean attacks due to thinking anti-Korean propaganda is wrong, and of course throwing in with the anti-corporate bandwagons... that's pretty much conspiracy fodder at this point, since even King Liberal himself has acknowledged it. Of course there being any real retaliation is in doubt. What's more one of the big reasons why this being a ploy by Sony makes little sense is that it wouldn't have called in direct terror threats against Theaters since it needs those to show the movie. While a lot of people are seeing "The Interview" Sony is not exactly making much, if any, money off of this.
At any rate that kind of thing strikes me as being a big deal on a lot of levels.
Someone putting nude photos of a celebrity, especially of one that makes a living based on her attractiveness, online is no big deal. To me that's more "phrank" material, it is "wrong" but ultimately pretty harmless despite people trying to balloon it into some kind of big issue of platform. People have been passing photos of each other in compromising positions around High Schools and College Campuses for ages. It's embarrassing for about 15 minutes and good for a laugh but ultimately fades away and nobody cares. Heck they even make jokes about it in Teen/College experience movies going both ways. To me it seems like people with leftward leaning politics trying to make a big deal out of something relatively petty.
Now if your trying to blackmail someone with compromising photos, that's an entirely different cup of tea.
Despite how callous this sounds, I'm actually a big believer in women's rights, I just don't feel it goes to the point of putting them on an untouchable pedestal, and honestly issues like this while tied to Women's rights are more universal than directed specifically at them as embarrassing pictures of dudes also get circulated.
To me focusing on things like that are intended to get around addressing the real issues and problems. To be blunt while it's not Utopian (and we will never have a Utopia) women in the US, and the European first world have it great. Women in the rest of the world, Asia, India, The Middle East, Africa, not so much. Indeed it can be argued that the majority of women don't have it very good at all. As a result I find it ridiculous to see celebrity "ambassadors" like Emma Watson QQing before the UN about Women's Rights while addressing relatively petty first world concerns, many of which are little more than political constructs designed to make a mountain out of a mole hill so there is an issue to fight. Basically when you have huge numbers of women basically living in physical and spiritual slavery through The Middle East, and being stoned to death for crimes like "not marrying the guy who raped you", it seems kind of ridiculous to be spending all kinds of energy crying about webcam hackers putting nude pictures on the internet, especially when the complaints come from people who make a career out of throwing high kicks in blue body paint. I find it ridiculous to see Emma Watson getting praise for example while entirely ignoring the real issues, and praise of her "brave speech" coming from China among others when China is one of the nations that this kind of energy should be being spent against.
One of the reasons why I am so militant about wrecking the entire culture of The Middle East is the treatment of women as slaves (granted it's only one of the reasons). Changing things and freeing the women down there was a big part of the selling point when we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, and one of the reasons I supported the efforts. People might deny it now, but when this war was being sold a lot of reasons were given for acting beyond terrorism. It's a big part of why I've been critical of both Bush and Obama in conducting operations in the region and such a supporter of "total war" doctrine with an eye towards long term changes (which I won't go into again here). Many will say this was never what the war was about, but like it or not it was ONE of the reasons we were stated to be there, and it's part of why I feel it was insulting when both Afghanistan and Iraq were allowed o declare themselves "Islamic Nations" in their new charter when we ripped down their regime which meant we didn't even plant the seeds of cultural reform on paper. We should have asserted ourselves a lot more in that process at the very least.
At any rate my basic attitude is that when UN Ambassadors like Emma Watson start leading bands of Royal Marine commandoes to intervene violently when tribes of Muslims decide to stone women instead of the world sitting back impotently, that will be when they start doing some real good. Instead we see feminists talking crap about nude pictures on the internet like it's a big deal, probably because the other issues are too big, and they are safe enough in the first world to not suffer any real retaliation, where if they say intervened overseas where a REAL champion would be, they would be risking a horrible death.
In short women's rights shouldn't be using sheltered celebrities throwing brat attacks over relatively petty things in the first world as it's figure heads. As much as I loathe her at least Jane Fonda had some guts in her crusades and say travelled to Veitnam to protest Veitnam. Amazing how with an issue I agree with (unlike that) all our allegedly "strong women" are a bunch of cowering babies. Tell Jennifer Lawrence if she wants to be taken seriously as a women's lib crusader she can use some of her money to hire bodyguards, and then say wear a painted on costume into a highly fundamental Muslim area and fellate or straddle the Koran or other religious iconography. Then she'll be worthy of using her celebrity status to make a statement (before anyone comments, this is an Analogy to Jane Fonda straddling a missile in Hanoi, as I said I disagree with what she stood for, but she at least had guts instead of just QQing from a relative ivory tower).