[aaronbasssett]

They do have permission though. The people used granted permission when they submitted their face to uifaces.com, in fact they even went so far as to submit their faces to the "authorised" section on uifaces

> those awesome folks allow their faces to be used on live products

They might not have ever imagined that their faces would be used in this manner, but they did give their permission.

[Silhouette]

If you read further down the Twitter feed, it's clear that this particular person didn't think she'd granted such permission, and the whole setup looks questionable on other grounds as well.

Putting someone's face next to suggestions of serious problems like drug abuse or STIs on a public site without their knowledge or explicit consent at least raises ethical questions, and then trying to argue that it's obviously a joke when apparently the person in question has been receiving concerned mail from friends who didn't know that makes it pretty clear that any joke has gone too far. The dismissive attitude of the site developer just makes it worse.

[aaronbasssett]

I did read the entire thread, the site developer offered two different solutions. But the other commenters seemed to dismiss both suggestions, preferring to fetch their pitchforks instead.

[paulcole]

> Putting someone's face next to suggestions of serious problems like drug abuse or STIs on a public site without their knowledge or explicit consent at least raises ethical questions

This was the plot of a Friends episode like 20 years ago. Joey's face is used in a herpes ad in the subway.

I think he got paid but the issue is the same. Give someone carte blanche to use your likeness and there might be some negative consequences.