SnitchSeeker.com - Rowling wins landmark privacy ruling

SnitchSeeker.com (https://www.snitchseeker.com/forum.php)

- Harry Potter News (https://www.snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/)

- - Rowling wins landmark privacy ruling (https://www.snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/rowling-wins-landmark-privacy-ruling-55885/)

Rowling wins landmark privacy ruling

The Press Association is reporting that J.K. Rowling has won a landmark privacy ruling involving photos taken of her son, David, who was 18 months old at the time. Publication of the pictures, taken via a covert long lens, has now been banned.

Quote:

In a key finding, the Master of the Rolls, Sir Anthony Clarke, said: "If a child of parents who are not in the public eye could reasonably expect not to have photographs of him published in the media, so too should the child of a famous parent."

Quote:

In a statement, the parents said: "We embarked on this lawsuit not because we were seeking special privileges for our children but because we wanted them to grow up, like their friends, free from unwarranted intrusion into their privacy.

"We understand and accept that with the success of Harry Potter there will be a measure of legitimate media and public interest in Jo's professional activities and appearances. However, we have striven to give our children a normal family life outside the media spotlight."

They said the ruling would give their children protection from "covert, unauthorised photography" and make an "immediate and material difference to their lives".

Quote:

Their solicitor, Keith Schilling, said the ruling established a law of privacy for children from "intrusive photography."

"It will have a profound effect, especially on certain sections of the paparazzi, but I am sure that the overwhelming majority of the media will welcome it."

They previously won the case in 2006, against the Sunday Express & Big Pictures Ltd.

Well done Jo! We'll always be behind you in any law cases!

Congratulations Jo - doing "what was right rather than easy"! (that sounds familiar?)
Why is it that when publishing photo's of minors is generally frowned upon (without permission) then how is publishing (or posting) photo's of "famous" children suddenly OK? Fortunately JKR now has the money to see this through the legal system so that the courts could do the right thing for a change!!

If I were someone famous and someone snapped a photo of one of my daughters, i would be seeing red! I would have a new worry on top of all the other stuff you have to worry about. These over the top photogs need to back off children already.

she was right, she is going to be photographed but not her children they are famous, fair enough if he is in the shot but they blur his face after all there are crazy people int he workd who would want to harm her children for money or things.

this should go for all people within the public eye

I'm glad she won. Her poor children don't need that.

Quote:

this should go for all people within the public eye

I don't think so. There are some people who use their children as publicity tools, by taking them on the red carpet and such. Jo is different in that she has made a concerted effort to refrain from putting them in the public eye. It's a credit to her & her husband that most of us have no idea what Jessica, David or Mackenzie look like.

I didn't even know she had children until I read about Jessica in a newspaper article. I think she has every right to keep her life private, she doesn't want her children to grow up being hassled by cameramen/women or wild and crazy fans. If it were me I'd do the same.

She is such a busy woman. Congrats on winning the ruling. Paparazzi get on my nerves & I don't even have to deal with them. Lol.

That's great! Jo's kids shouldn't have to be subjected to paparazzi constantly flashing cameras in their faces, they have the right to privacy. YAY for Jo and her family!

awesome......jolly good show you did Jo

that's really great!

Oh my good. Poor kid! I'm so glad, that Jo won!

I agree with monkey_princess!!!!!

I'm glad Jo won, her children should be allowed to live their lives with privacy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aliciahutchinson (Post 6595960)

I agree with monkey_princess!!!!!

I also agree but not abt the newspaper thing..I knew that a while ago

I'm so glad that Jo's kids will be able to live in relative normality. They've already been forced to deal with more than other children their ages have to. You go, Jo! Way to stand up for your children.

We need more cases like this one in the States. There are just too many people out there being stalked by the paparazzi and when it affects their children negatively it should be stopped.

well done jo you show them

Excellent! I'm really glad Jo won, it wasn't very right, photographing her son without her permission or consent. :/

Good for her! You go JO!