Followup: JK Rowling Wins Appeal on Child Photo Privacy Case

102

May 07, 2008

Posted by SueTLC
Uncategorized

Previously we told you of a legal matter involving author J.K. Rowling and photographs of her young 18 month old son that were published in a UK paper several years ago. In effort to protect their privacy of their young children, the case went to court, and today Jo and her husband Dr. Neil Murray won an appeal that would ban further publication of photographs. According to the BBC, the couple released a statement about this matter, stating:

“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. We are immensely grateful to the court for giving our children protection from covert, unauthorised photography; this ruling will make an immediate and material difference to their lives.”

In making the ruling, one of the judges involved 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. In our opinion, it is at least arguable that a child of ‘ordinary’ parents could reasonably expect that the press would not target him and publish photographs of him.”

Reuters also reports an attorney for J.K. Rowling reflected on the impact this ruling will have for the media in the UK, as he is quoted as saying this case will have a “profound effect … on certain sections of the paparazzi.This case establishes a law of privacy for children in those cases where, understandably, the parents wish to protect their children from intrusive photography by the paparazzi,” he said. “I am sure that the overwhelming majority of the media will welcome it.”

Thanks to the many who emailed!





30 Responses to Followup: JK Rowling Wins Appeal on Child Photo Privacy Case

Avatar Image says:

I’m so glad that the courts made the correct decision to protect the privacy of Jo & Neil’s children. It’s unfortunate that in the state of our world today that many paparazzi and journalists have no sense of propriety any more regarding what civilized behavior is.

Avatar Image says:

Woop 2nd comment!!

At least Jo is having some legal luck at the moment.

Avatar Image says:

Im glad Jo pursued this. Every parent has the right to protect their children. : )

Avatar Image says:

Wow congrations

Avatar Image says:

I’m glad Jo won something in court. This case should have been a no-brainer. It’s intrusive and dangerous to publish photos of a celebrity’s child.

I’m glad you won Neil and Jo!

Avatar Image says:

YES, YES and YES !!!! WOOOOpeeeeee for JKR. At last, one in the eye for the loathsome paparazzi. May it be the first of many triumphs for JKR this summer.

Avatar Image says:

Yeah! Maybe this will be the first of multiple victories for Jo this summer.

Avatar Image says:

Glad to hear that sense won out in this case, and that Jo and Neil’s children can lead a paparazzi-free life now. Just hope the judge can see sense in the Lexicon book case now.

Avatar Image says:

wohoo!

Excellent news. Children should be allowed to remain children away from the spotlight.

Avatar Image says:

This is so great! I’ve been waiting for this. This verdict means a great deal for childrens rights. I hope the press (that is to say, certain parts of the press) in other countries will take notice and show greater respect for childen – who ever their parents are!

Avatar Image says:

I supported her in this one and rightly so. However, I dont support her case against the Lexicon.

Avatar Image says:

Way to go Mr. and Mrs. Murray! If they don’t ask your permission, they should not be able to publish photos of underage children.

Avatar Image says:

This is good. I’m glad Jo fought it further. More celebs should do this.

Although I’m surprised it was a UK paper not an international since I thought that in the UK publications including magazines like Hello and OK!, they had to always blur the faces of celeb kids unlike the US publications.

Celeb kids are not famous. They are cute to look at but it’s not the point. The obsession the US mags have with for example Shiloh and Suri is over the top.

Avatar Image says:

Steve is sooooooooooooo going down!

Avatar Image says:

Oh my God! I remember this!

That’s one going on two court wins for Jo coming up!

Avatar Image says:

This makes me so happy. I’m so glad Jo won that case.

Avatar Image says:

That’s interesting, Rachel… I’d always thought Hello! was Spanish (Hola!) but I looked it up and it did start in the UK after all. It has Canadian and Russian editions too. Gah… perfect for the Skeeters :P

Anyhow, YAY!!! This outcome was everything we hoped for!

Avatar Image says:

yeaah, go jo :D xxxx

Avatar Image says:

It’s a very good thing this happened, as it was invasive into the privacy of a young child.

Am I the only one who just saw the “Jo Wins appeal” on the RSS widget and went “YES!” thinking it was the Lexicon case?

Avatar Image says:

Yay Jo!

Avatar Image says:

Speaking as a professional photographer, I think this verdict is fantastic! The people who operate as paparazzi give all photographers a bad name, The children of famous or “ordinary” parents are not public figures and should be afforded a standard of privacy across the board.

Children who are famous in their own right should expect some incursion into their private lives, just because there is a market for that sort of thing and they are “product”. As much as I wish the paparazzi would just go away, this should be a forward step towards restricting their actions.

Avatar Image says:

Yup Zach, I did the same thing! My heart stopped…unti I read the rest of the title. And the RDR case isn’t an appeal yet anyway. Oh well. At least this was handled properly. I hope her other legal affairs also resolve well.

Avatar Image says:

As a law student this is really fascinating because we don’t really have much of a law of privacy yet in this country – this is likely to be a very significant case for UK law so it is rather exciting!

Avatar Image says:

JKR may end up in court in many countries all over the world to stop such pictures, not just in the UK. Here in Norway we’ve had several court rulings already in celeb cases that goes in the same direction as Jo’s victory here. But the papparazzis can just sell their pictures to Germany or some other country, where no such ruling has occured yet…

So let’s have international laws for these things. The media world is global, so should the laws be.

Avatar Image says:

Good for them! I can’t even remember reading about this case, but I’m glad the law is acting to protect all children, despite the status of their parents. That’s such a risky thing to do, publishing photographs of celebrity’s children, it’s awful that some people will do that in order to get money. It really puts the child’s safety at risk, there are some super crazy people out there who could become stalkers or worse. It’s pretty scary. Like a previous poster mentioned, it’s disturbing how obsessed the US media is with Tom Cruise’s and Brad Pitt’s children.

Avatar Image says:

Good,sound judgement. Just because a person is in the public doesn’t mean that their children have to be dragged into it too. And good to see Jo’s legally lucky these days!

Avatar Image says:

Woot! This is very good news , not just for Jo but for everyone who has to deal with the paparazzi. Good job Jo and Neil, for not giving up.

Avatar Image says:

Wonderful! Justice is not blind. All parents should be allowed to protect their children. Period.

Avatar Image says:

I agree with the decision to keep the children away from most photographers. If the child’s picture was requested by the school to make public through the school the Parents must sign an agreement to have their kids picture taken and used towards use in the public eye so I would expect it is only natural for privacy request to be kept just like we all natrually have the right to do!

Avatar Image says:

Good news, all kids have the right of a privat life. (Well the adults too) Sadly it needed the court to underline this.

I hope very much that Jo soon will have peace in the other court case too. Thumbs up.

Write a Reply or Comment

Finding Hogwarts

The Leaky Cauldron is not associated with J.K. Rowling, Warner Bros., or any of the individuals or companies associated with producing and publishing Harry Potter books and films.