thaluikhain said:
The hell?
How is that even legal? Though the second link has a link to a charity related masturbating to stolen images thing, which...yeah...
Probably it's not legal, but rather a marketing stunt of the museum. We have seen such before.
As for the basic issue:
1. Photoshops don't compare. They are not real. It's awkward, but not a severe violation of privacy.
2. Paparrazi images matter more than photoshops, but it's still not nearly as bad as leaking privately made photos.
3. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the affected celebrities gets a severe depression about this, maybe even commits suicide. I'm baffled by the lack of understanding why the incident is a problem.
4. Don't go "why did they even make the photo" or "why did they upload them anyway?". It's the same line of argumentation as "why did she wear a short skirt if she didn't want to get raped"*. For a start it's not exactly like you'll hear a lot about the downsides of the cloud if you're not privately interested in technology and judging someone for making private nude photos of him-/herself only makes you sound like a narrow-minded jerk.
--------
* I'm well aware that rape would be way worse, but the argumentation (blaming the victim) is still the same.