Why the fascination with Kimmer? #15 - Page 48

Mayberryfan · 03-27-2008, 06:57 AM

Drakette sends me more evidence that Kimmer steals.

Shocking, I know!

I found Heidi's source for the deviled eggs pic on the header of her "newsletter" Here is the link:
~link removed~

Here is their copyright info. Copyright ©2007 by American Egg Board. All rights reserved. Photographs and illustrations, as well as text, cannot be used without permission from AEB.

------
In the recipe box she has a recipe for BLT Cucumbers. The pic and recipe were lifted from ~link removed~

-----
Kimmer calls this one Chinese Chicken Soup

~link removed~

Kimmer calls it Artichoke Frittata
~link removed~

oh, one more. This one is from the Pork Board how ironic. Kimmer calls it Ham and Chicken gumbo

~link removed~

Btw, Drakette has made the appropriate screenshots and sent this evidence off to John. More nails for the coffin!

pooticus · 03-27-2008, 07:00 AM

Here is the November 12th photo added to the line up. Get it? Line up? So since Hidey is so fond of her power color (red) I had to alter the hue of the photo in order to compare it to her latest lady in red photo. I made it puke green. Why puke green? Is there really any need for explanation on color theory with this??

ccrickett · 03-27-2008, 07:04 AM

[quote=Magicsmom;10108536]

Actually, yes it's been discussed, quite a while ago. I think the consensus was that WW would be very hard to go after. They were deceived by Heidi just as we all were. Now if there were any proof they knew they were printing lies and fraud, it would be a different story.

Hi everyone, I've skimmed all 15 threads and read some of the blogs. WOW The question from Little Miss and Magicsmom's reply sent me back to check out the WW article again. If I'm reading the credits at the bottom of the page correctly, WW gave a photo credit to "Jupiter Images; courtesy of Kim Drake; courtesy of Kimkins.com" Since the only photo in the article from Jupiter Images is the after of Kimmer, doesn't that infer that WW knew in advance that the picture of Kimmer was a stock photo from Jupiter Images? If I'm way off base or this has already been addressed, please ignore this post, I just thought I'd try to help in some small way.

pooticus · 03-27-2008, 07:06 AM

[quote=ccrickett;10109404]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magicsmom

Actually, yes it's been discussed, quite a while ago. I think the consensus was that WW would be very hard to go after. They were deceived by Heidi just as we all were. Now if there were any proof they knew they were printing lies and fraud, it would be a different story.

Hi everyone, I've skimmed all 15 threads and read some of the blogs. WOW The question from Little Miss and Magicsmom's reply sent me back to check out the WW article again. If I'm reading the credits at the bottom of the page correctly, WW gave a photo credit to "Jupiter Images; courtesy of Kim Drake; courtesy of Kimkins.com" Since the only photo in the article from Jupiter Images is the after of Kimmer, doesn't that infer that WW knew in advance that the picture of Kimmer was a stock photo from Jupiter Images? If I'm way off base or this has already been addressed, please ignore this post, I just thought I'd try to help in some small way.

For those who might now know, Jupiter Images is a very prominent stock photo house.

Magicsmom · 03-27-2008, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barbara B

1. Possibly to maintain her sense of controlling Amy
2. To use her all over again as a success story
3. To keep tabs on her

A big part of Heidi's gig is controlling people. I think she gets off on having people "need" her advice and look up to her.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pooticus

For those who might now know, Jupiter Images is a very prominent stock photo house.

Thanks, Pooti, I was head-scratching for a minute there wondering what Jupiter Images had to do with anything. Do people pay Jupiter Images to store their photos? I ask because I'm wondering if WW would have known from the Jupiter Images part that it was a fake photo. Might they have had reason to believe it was "Kim Drake" and that she paid Jupiter to store her photos?

pooticus · 03-27-2008, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magicsmom

Thanks, Pooti, I was head-scratching for a minute there wondering what Jupiter Images had to do with anything. Do people pay Jupiter Images to store their photos? I ask because I'm wondering if WW would have known from the Jupiter Images part that it was a fake photo. Might they have had reason to believe it was "Kim Drake" and that she paid Jupiter to store her photos?

No, Jupiter Images buys photos from photographers then resells them or rather they buy the rights to resell the rights of use to others. You "buy" images from Jupiter Image in order to use them for private or commercial use. You are bound by a use agreement that limits the amount of "exposures" or uses you get and it also limits how you get to use them.

JI is not a photo storage place.

Magicsmom · 03-27-2008, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pooticus

No, Jupiter Images buys photos from photographers then resells them or rather they buy the rights to resell the rights of use to others. You "buy" images from Jupiter Image in order to use them for private or commercial use. You are bound by a use agreement that limits the amount of "exposures" or uses you get and it also limits how you get to use them.

JI is not a photo storage place.

Heidi testified in her depo that Clexus had provided the photo to WW, but we know that it was taken from a Russian bride site. So where does Jupiter fit in?

Tooter · 03-27-2008, 07:22 AM

[quote=ccrickett;10109404]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magicsmom

Actually, yes it's been discussed, quite a while ago. I think the consensus was that WW would be very hard to go after. They were deceived by Heidi just as we all were. Now if there were any proof they knew they were printing lies and fraud, it would be a different story.

Hi everyone, I've skimmed all 15 threads and read some of the blogs. WOW The question from Little Miss and Magicsmom's reply sent me back to check out the WW article again. If I'm reading the credits at the bottom of the page correctly, WW gave a photo credit to "Jupiter Images; courtesy of Kim Drake; courtesy of Kimkins.com" Since the only photo in the article from Jupiter Images is the after of Kimmer, doesn't that infer that WW knew in advance that the picture of Kimmer was a stock photo from Jupiter Images? If I'm way off base or this has already been addressed, please ignore this post, I just thought I'd try to help in some small way.

You jogged my memory...I remember way back in thread 1? Looking at that stuff.

Yes, I believe they did know.

No, I do not believe they were "taken in" by Heidi. That had shoddy reporting. They reported the article like they were sitting right next to Heidi. Even said she "smiled" at one point. The interview was over the Phone and she refused to go to the Photo shoot. She sent in a picture.

To me, that's not someone "taken in" by Her. They knew better and knew something was up, but wanted the story more. These people are "reporters" and it never stirred up there interest to find the truth...and here you have people here (ducks) who aren't reporters and it stirred all of them up and they found the truth.

Actually, WW Lied. They are not innocent at all. They helped Heidi seem real with reporting like they actually met her and checked things out (which they did not). To me, WW and Heidi are of the same cloth. It's not an "oops" thing. They did it on purpose. They used each other at the expense of the "readers".

Tooter · 03-27-2008, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magicsmom

Heidi testified in her depo that Clexus had provided the photo to WW, but we know that it was taken from a Russian bride site. So where does Jupiter fit in?

Wasn't it stock photo's of the Food pictures on the page?

Tooter · 03-27-2008, 07:29 AM

Ok, I'm remembering here...I thought Heidi's after pic was a stock photo and we were trying to find it.

I believe that the credits that were given to Juniper (or whatever the name was) and the others were photos for the pictures of the Food, the tape measure and other photo's in the WW story. Nothing lead to Heidi's picture. Not until the Russian brides thing.

2big4mysize · 03-27-2008, 07:29 AM

thanks for the info pooticus.

Does anybody have the smaller kimmer front page already lost 20+ pounds pic from her first set of before and afters that was so photoshoped with the side and front view so Pooticuss could show us how much weight Kimmer has gained since then with her layered lineup. I know it is in here but I'm sure the pixels are better on the orgina; screen shot somebody got.

Magicsmom · 03-27-2008, 07:29 AM

[quote=Tooter;10109501]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccrickett

You jogged my memory...I remember way back in thread 1? Looking at that stuff.

Yes, I believe they did know.

No, I do not believe they were "taken in" by Heidi. That had shoddy reporting. They reported the article like they were sitting right next to Heidi. Even said she "smiled" at one point. The interview was over the Phone and she refused to go to the Photo shoot. She sent in a picture.

To me, that's not someone "taken in" by Her. They knew better and knew something was up, but wanted the story more. These people are "reporters" and it never stirred up there interest to find the truth...and here you have people here (ducks) who aren't reporters and it stirred all of them up and they found the truth.

Actually, WW Lied. They are not innocent at all. They helped Heidi seem real with reporting like they actually met her and checked things out (which they did not). To me, WW and Heidi are of the same cloth. It's not an "oops" thing. They did it on purpose. They used each other at the expense of the "readers".

So then, back to Little Miss' question, why hasn't someone gone after WW? If there is empirical proof that WW knowingly printed lies, there should be a compelling reason to go after them. BTW, I agree that they are of the same cloth as Heidi. Same goes for all the supermarket rags. I think if there is proof that WW aided and abetted Heidi, there may be something down the road, but the more obvious target for a takedown is Heidi herself. A lawsuit against WW would be very dicey. The only ones who could take part are those who joined because they read about her in WW. It certainly would make for a much smaller class.

rebel · 03-27-2008, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barbara B

LOL! I haven't smoked a butt lately either. I'm on day 37 of a smoking quit!

Good for you! I know how hard it must be to quit. I know people who have and people who tried to.

As for "smoking a butt," that was included in the frivilous banter, recipes, etc.

that keeps me entertained and motivated to continue the fight to take Heidi down. You know what they say about "all work and no fun."

ccrickett · 03-27-2008, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tooter

Wasn't it stock photo's of the Food pictures on the page?

Hi Tooter, I hope you don't mind if I answer here. The rest of the credits are "Michael Tracy/HBB (4). Food Stylist: Ellie Ritt" There were 4 food pics, so the only picture I can see in the article from Jupiter Images is the Kimmer after.

Tooter · 03-27-2008, 07:32 AM

Well, they did publish that apology (NOT) and I Think the rag sheets (which is what it is) have deep pockets.

I think someone "Could" go after them, but it would take years.

It's something that should be looked into...but I don't think it would have any benefit. The only thing that would happen is an "award" of money. They aren't going to stop their magazine, and they aren't going to change their ways. I just don't see how it would make a big deal. That's just my opinion.

MissMerize · 03-27-2008, 07:32 AM

Look what I made in school today

Magicsmom · 03-27-2008, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tooter

Wasn't it stock photo's of the Food pictures on the page?

Very likely that the stock photos from Jupiter were the food pics, not the Kim Drake pic. The "Kim Drake" pic was from a russian bride site. I don't have the full pic of her, but this was on the home page, and that's how it got found:

Magicsmom · 03-27-2008, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tooter

Well, they did publish that apology (NOT) and I Think the rag sheets (which is what it is) have deep pockets.

I think someone "Could" go after them, but it would take years.

It's something that should be looked into...but I don't think it would have any benefit. The only thing that would happen is an "award" of money. They aren't going to stop their magazine, and they aren't going to change their ways. I just don't see how it would make a big deal. That's just my opinion.

ITA! Taking down WW is not what the ducks care about. It's Heidi we want!

rebel · 03-27-2008, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissMerize

Look what I made in school today

I'm giving you an A++.

Tooter · 03-27-2008, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccrickett

Hi Tooter, I hope you don't mind if I answer here. The rest of the credits are "Michael Tracy/HBB (4). Food Stylist: Ellie Ritt" There were 4 food pics, so the only picture I can see in the article from Jupiter Images is the Kimmer after.

ccrickett, I no longer have my old copy of the WW magazine. I remember there were a certain number of pictures (images) and after we all went through them (one by one) it came out that they were pictures of food, the tape measure and maybe something else. I don't remember...I just remember they did "add up". I also remember that a bunch of us searched Jupiter Images...and that all seemed to add up.

I believe the credits are in Order. (as to how they appear) and it seemed like the one would be credit for Heidi, but after going through...It wasn't.

Like I said, I don't have the article anymore. But I had been the one to think like you were thinking. That the Jupiter image was for her, and it ended up it was for some other picture or image. Others on here had showed me that.

ETA: I wanted to add, there were images that we didn't consider Pics that were in the credit...One of them was for the "tape Measure" and I think something else. Not pictures of food or people. Every image gets a "credit". I can't go back and look at it, since I threw out the old magazine...but that's how I remember it.

ccrickett · 03-27-2008, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tooter

ccrickett, I no longer have my old copy of the WW magazine. I remember there were a certain number of pictures (images) and after we all went through them (one by one) it came out that they were pictures of food, the tape measure and maybe something else. I don't remember...I just remember they did "add up". I also remember that a bunch of us searched Jupiter Images...and that all seemed to add up.

I believe the credits are in Order. (as to how they appear) and it seemed like the one would be credit for Heidi, but after going through...It wasn't.

Like I said, I don't have the article anymore. But I had been the one to think like you were thinking. That the Jupiter image was for her, and it ended up it was for some other picture or image. Others on here had showed me that.

Ok thanks tooter, I just remembered that this "bride" was also a Jupiter Images stock photo and it seemed to me that WW had to know it in order to give the credit. Back to lurking!

Tooter · 03-27-2008, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccrickett

Ok thanks tooter, I just remembered that this "bride" was also a Jupiter Images stock photo and it seemed to me that WW had to know it in order to give the credit. Back to lurking!

No Problem. And my saying that they "knew"? Was because they never met her in person (only over the phone) and lied in the interview.

Interesting about the Brides being Jupiter too. Things come full circle, eh?

pooticus · 03-27-2008, 07:48 AM

I really would lean toward it being a food photo as the stock image.

Tooter · 03-27-2008, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pooticus

I really would lean toward it being a food photo as the stock image.

I will so see If I can find the old posts. give me a minute.

03-27-2008, 06:57 AM	#1411
Mayberryfan MAJOR LCF POSTER! Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Alabama Posts: 1,349 Gallery: Mayberryfan Stats: 255/204/150 WOE: PPLP Start Date: June 6, 2007	More Thievery in the Kimpound Drakette sends me more evidence that Kimmer steals. Shocking, I know! I found Heidi's source for the deviled eggs pic on the header of her "newsletter" Here is the link: ~link removed~ Here is their copyright info. Copyright ©2007 by American Egg Board. All rights reserved. Photographs and illustrations, as well as text, cannot be used without permission from AEB. ------ In the recipe box she has a recipe for BLT Cucumbers. The pic and recipe were lifted from ~link removed~ ----- Kimmer calls this one Chinese Chicken Soup ~link removed~ Kimmer calls it Artichoke Frittata ~link removed~ oh, one more. This one is from the Pork Board how ironic. Kimmer calls it Ham and Chicken gumbo ~link removed~ Btw, Drakette has made the appropriate screenshots and sent this evidence off to John. More nails for the coffin! __________________ _________________ "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson .......... http://mayberryfan.blogspot.com/

03-27-2008, 07:00 AM	#1412
pooticus Way too much time on my hands! Join Date: May 2004 Location: somewhere over the rainbow Posts: 15,764 Gallery: pooticus Stats: 314/258.2/150 WOE: PersonalPlan Start Date: Nov.20, 2007	Here is the November 12th photo added to the line up. Get it? Line up? So since Hidey is so fond of her power color (red) I had to alter the hue of the photo in order to compare it to her latest lady in red photo. I made it puke green. Why puke green? Is there really any need for explanation on color theory with this?? Last edited by pooticus : 03-27-2008 at 07:02 AM.

03-27-2008, 07:04 AM	#1413
ccrickett Senior LCF Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 86 Gallery: ccrickett Stats: 199/180/160 WOE: LCtweaks	[quote=Magicsmom;10108536] Actually, yes it's been discussed, quite a while ago. I think the consensus was that WW would be very hard to go after. They were deceived by Heidi just as we all were. Now if there were any proof they knew they were printing lies and fraud, it would be a different story. Hi everyone, I've skimmed all 15 threads and read some of the blogs. WOW The question from Little Miss and Magicsmom's reply sent me back to check out the WW article again. If I'm reading the credits at the bottom of the page correctly, WW gave a photo credit to "Jupiter Images; courtesy of Kim Drake; courtesy of Kimkins.com" Since the only photo in the article from Jupiter Images is the after of Kimmer, doesn't that infer that WW knew in advance that the picture of Kimmer was a stock photo from Jupiter Images? If I'm way off base or this has already been addressed, please ignore this post, I just thought I'd try to help in some small way.

03-27-2008, 07:29 AM	#1420
Tooter Big Yapper!!!! Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 8,185 Gallery: Tooter Stats: 5' 6" and 128 lbs	Ok, I'm remembering here...I thought Heidi's after pic was a stock photo and we were trying to find it. I believe that the credits that were given to Juniper (or whatever the name was) and the others were photos for the pictures of the Food, the tape measure and other photo's in the WW story. Nothing lead to Heidi's picture. Not until the Russian brides thing.

03-27-2008, 07:29 AM	#1421
2big4mysize Very Gabby LCF Member!!! Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 4,491 Gallery: 2big4mysize Stats: 313 to current goalie 169-173 WOE: Atkins 2002 Start Date: june 1 2002	thanks for the info pooticus. Does anybody have the smaller kimmer front page already lost 20+ pounds pic from her first set of before and afters that was so photoshoped with the side and front view so Pooticuss could show us how much weight Kimmer has gained since then with her layered lineup. I know it is in here but I'm sure the pixels are better on the orgina; screen shot somebody got.

03-27-2008, 07:32 AM	#1425
Tooter Big Yapper!!!! Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 8,185 Gallery: Tooter Stats: 5' 6" and 128 lbs	Well, they did publish that apology (NOT) and I Think the rag sheets (which is what it is) have deep pockets. I think someone "Could" go after them, but it would take years. It's something that should be looked into...but I don't think it would have any benefit. The only thing that would happen is an "award" of money. They aren't going to stop their magazine, and they aren't going to change their ways. I just don't see how it would make a big deal. That's just my opinion.

03-27-2008, 07:32 AM	#1426
MissMerize MAJOR LCF POSTER! Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: North East Posts: 1,145 Gallery: MissMerize Stats: 170/162/142 WOE: Meat and Martini Diet, cycled with oopsie rolls Start Date: 3/18/08	Look what I made in school today

03-27-2008, 07:48 AM	#1433
pooticus Way too much time on my hands! Join Date: May 2004 Location: somewhere over the rainbow Posts: 15,764 Gallery: pooticus Stats: 314/258.2/150 WOE: PersonalPlan Start Date: Nov.20, 2007	I really would lean toward it being a food photo as the stock image.