While I think the ad is tasteless, I thought large chain business built on reputation were above this, they haven't done anything legally wrong here.

If she posed for the photos, and was paid by the photographer as the model, she had to have signed a disclosure contract that allowed the photographer to sell her image. I'm guessing that it wasn't Burger King she posed for when these photos were taken but an independent photographer, or image bank like Getty Images.

So once she has modeled and collected her paycheck, (or maybe, no paycheck), she has entered into a contract whereby the photographer or artist who took the photos has full say on how those images are used, in this case sold to a major fast food chain.

And it's not Rape. In now way is this rape. Disappointing and a bit embarrassing and by-and-large a completely inappropriate ad for a family focused restaurant chain. But then Burger King is know for it's sometimes inappropriate ads.

I will also say that it was an unprofessional move to buy the model footage and not take their own photos with a willing model. Big companies who can afford it, should never be purchasing stock photos from a service for this very reason, someone will notice and call them out. Big companies have a professional reputation to uphold. This ad campaign was a cop-out, without professionalism.

I'll bet this ad was created by a secondary party as well, and not by Burger King staff creative. Sometimes large corporations can't police every ad that is made in their name - which is unfortunate. I work for a small company and it's often a nightmare trying to police all the creative that gets made which doesn't get filtered through the Public Affairs department.