She was just 17, so you know what that means.
Specifically, it means Girls Gone Wild honcho Joe Francis may have to think twice before he starts peddling five-year-old footage of Ashley Alexandra Dupré, the now 22-year-old call girl who factored into the downfall of ex-New York Governor Eliot Spitzer.
Francis' Mantra Films announced it had withdrawn a $1 million offer to Dupré to take part in the 2008 GGW spring-break tour, after it unearthed video of her shot in March 2003 in Miami. Dupré's lawyer, Don A. Buchwald, immediately took steps to inform Francis that the New Jersey native, her birthday being April 30, 1985, was only 17 when the footage was taken.
But Francis tells E! News he's going ahead with the release anyway, albeit not for at least a few days while his lawyers debate the repercussions.
"We are getting pressure from her lawyer," Francis said at his Santa Monica, Calif., office Wednesday. "As soon as we withdrew the million dollar offer—he is just mad because her price has dropped. Even if she was only 17, we could still release it. There was no sexual contact. There's only nudity." (View a clip of E! News' exclusive interview.)
According to Francis, as long as there's no sexual content, he can go ahead and post the footage online. He added that the video will be up "in the next couple of days."
But as unsavory as that sounds, legal experts say there's apparently something to his argument.
"I understand there is toplessness in this video, but no sexual conduct," Loyola Law School professor Stan Goldman told E! News. "The federal case in Florida, Lane v. MRA Holdings, that [GGW] are relying on would be relevant because this video was shot in Florida.
"This case defines what minors are precluded from consenting to and from the language it does not appear to preclude her from appearing topless as long as she is not paid."
A company rep said in a press release that Dupré signed the requisite paperwork before hopping aboard the GGW bus in 2003. Francis said that, in addition to topless shots of Dupré, he has tape of her kissing other girls.
"It would seem that he has a plausible legal argument to publish [the footage]," Goldman said. "I think he clearly has some cover in terms of prior case law. It would appear that he has a decent argument that she can consent to it even if she is under 18, which I understand they are not even sure that she was.
"This statute that they are referring to in this case lists 30 things that a minor cannot consent to and this [being topless] is not one of them."
—Additional reporting by Claudia Rosenbaum and Giuliana Rancic