Rowling loses court photo fight = Good
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6935012.stm
I don't want to make this a site where I rant every so often, but I think I have to comment on this one.
I wholeheartedly agree with the judge in this instance. Whilst I understand and agree that Miss Rowling should do everything she can to prevent the press intruding into the life of her child. I do feel she went to far with this case, if it had been successful it would have effectively opened every street photographer (in the UK) to possible litigation. I can't imagine a world where the only photos that could effectively be taken would be of sterile people-less environments.
Celebrities have to realise that if you are in a public place you essentially have no right to privacy - a right to personal space and the freedom to go about your business unharrassed? Yes. But a right to have all photos of you made private and remain unpublished - No
I don't want to make this a site where I rant every so often, but I think I have to comment on this one.
I wholeheartedly agree with the judge in this instance. Whilst I understand and agree that Miss Rowling should do everything she can to prevent the press intruding into the life of her child. I do feel she went to far with this case, if it had been successful it would have effectively opened every street photographer (in the UK) to possible litigation. I can't imagine a world where the only photos that could effectively be taken would be of sterile people-less environments.
Celebrities have to realise that if you are in a public place you essentially have no right to privacy - a right to personal space and the freedom to go about your business unharrassed? Yes. But a right to have all photos of you made private and remain unpublished - No
posted by Greg Kael at
8/08/2007 09:08:00 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home