|
AUGUST 9, 2007 at 2:51 PM
Posted by GERI
Source: HPANA
Earlier this week Harry Potter author JK Rowling lost
a court case in which she sued a UK photography agency seeking to ban the publication of a picture of her son.
Rowling, who filed the action under her married name Murray, was walking with her husband and son, when the picture was taken from a distance with a long lens. The judge in the case stated that celebrities are not guaranteed "a press-free zone for their children in respect of absolutely everything they choose to do."
Now a privacy law expert says that the judge did not take into account that celebrities may be more vulnerable to invasions of privacy than other people.
Mrs Murray and her family are vulnerable to media pressure on their private space. They may be rich; they may be privileged, but nevertheless these people are vulnerable, and I think there is a question of principle there that asks should the law be prepared to give them additional protection because of that vulnerability?
But the photograph of Mr and Mrs Murray and the child is wholly different. They are not street furniture; the photographer took that photograph covertly with a long lens camera specifically to produce information about them and publicise it to the world at large because it was information about them as specific living individuals. That is wholly different to taking a photograph of someone as they happen to be getting on a bus when you don't care who they are and no one else will know.
Ms. Rowling is appealing the decision.
Reader Comments (90)
Your Thoughts
click to write...
Copyright © 2002-2010 HPANA. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. 
HPANA is an unofficial fan site, in no way affiliated with J.K. Rowling,
Scholastic Books, Bloomsbury Publishing or Warner Bros. Entertainment. All
trademarks and copyrighted material are the property of their respective owners.
About HPANA | Movie 6 | Send a news tip | Contact us | Privacy policy
Prof. Alfred W. Mandoore
Points: 2492
JAYSTARR says:
I dont think JKR should worry much, there will loads of photographers taking pictures of her and her family for now on. Since she has finished her books and will be walking around town, especially with her childrens.
Posted Aug 12, 2007 at 7:41 PM EST
Professor
Points: 1065
GeeMessy says:
Okay that is dumb.
celebrities are people like us
and they have the right to enjoy their privacy
I hope she wins the appeal
Go JKR!
Posted Aug 12, 2007 at 8:51 PM EST
Witch
Points: 622
Hermison says:
Even though they are famous, they deserve their privacy. I feel sorry for her and her family. Maybe she should call reese witherspoon to ask for some advice.(she won in a similar case)
Posted Aug 12, 2007 at 9:52 PM EST
Queen of the Fae
Points: 4616
marauderette says:
I think she should appeal. I agree with the expert in that being a celebrity means she will have more people attacking not only her privacy, but that of her minor children. I thought there were laws to protect the minor children, maybe only here in the states.
And the fact that it was done stealth like with the long lens shows the photographers intent.
Posted Aug 13, 2007 at 1:08 PM EST
Order of Merlin, 1st Class
Points: 1815
hufflepuff_babe says:
In the US you can't take pictures of children without the parent's consent. I'm not sure if that is the same way in the UK.
Nonetheless, I'm glad JK is appealing the decision. Celebrities deserve privacy too!
Posted Aug 13, 2007 at 6:26 PM EST
Professor
Points: 1158
Moonbake says:
I understand being a mother myself that I would want to protect my child. but unfortunately she is a star and there are many people out there that would like to get a shot of her as a family. Its something as an acclaimed writer she has to learn to cope with.
Posted Aug 14, 2007 at 12:20 PM EST
Kathe Mera Kalimera
Points: 7720
dominor says:
Hmm.. Why did she react so badly? It was just a picture.. I don't know how old her son is, or if she has a problem, but i find it kinda ridiculous she went to court with this..
Posted Aug 14, 2007 at 10:06 PM EST
Professor
Points: 1098
Tonks' Twin says:
I think it was totally wrong, her son isn't the famous one, it's her. I think photographers sometimes step way out of line.
Posted Aug 15, 2007 at 4:04 AM EST
Hogwarts Social Worker
Points: 3671
SnoopyLover says:
I hope that the appeal goes through and JKR wins it. While she is an adult and aware of what it means to be famous, her son does not. I hope that whoever oversees the appeal will take that into consideration.
Posted Aug 16, 2007 at 12:37 AM EST
Squib
Points: 159
hpfan4lifexoxo says:
I think she should have won that case. Her son could be in danger no, that is not very fair of the court to say.
Posted Aug 16, 2007 at 7:27 AM EST
Heiress of Gryffindor
Points: 3537
Nienna Narmolanya says:
Huh, I didn't even know about this case... Well, this is hard to believe. JK Rowling filed a case and lost? What's up with that? Well, that's completely beside the point. Ahh, it's still wrong! You can't take pictures of people like that - isn't that stalking? I hope she wins the appeal.
Posted Aug 16, 2007 at 3:15 PM EST
Muggle
Points: 82
Brennae says:
That is so obnoxious! I mean, taking a picture of her son when she didn't even know they were there? Besides the fact that that's literally stalking, it's just plain rude and obnoxious. I feel so bad for her, and though I don't know the legal stuff, I hope she wins!
Posted Aug 23, 2007 at 10:49 PM EST
Professor
Points: 1161
sno-chik says:
THat's wrong. Leave her family alone! How would you feel if people were following your family around, and taking picture to tell the world where you are, and what you're doing?
It's wrong!
Posted Aug 29, 2007 at 12:26 AM EST
Witch
Points: 894
darkside rocker says:
I think the press should back off and leave her alone.
Posted Aug 31, 2007 at 1:43 PM EST
Auror
Points: 2621
hbluvhp says:
That must be such a pain to have to deal with the constant threat of press with long angled lenses lurking in the shadows at every point of your day. What a bummer!
Posted Sep 6, 2007 at 8:56 PM EST
Back to top of page