do the press have the right to print Kate photos ?

[waterhog]

top Kate less - exposure poem 18.09.12

i have to comment,
before its to late,
and if i new her email,
i would personally send this to Kate.
like Diana you are gold,
you are beautiful and mint,
and what the press are doing,
are rubbing you like a flint.
you have my full support,
most people are decent,
and understanding where the shateau is,
we are disgusted with the photos most recent.
i want my poem out there,
and yes the press have my approval,
on the few internet forums i use,
i hope it don't have removal.
you go Kate,
one beautiful rose,
we can all see what the scum press are doing,
but nothing of you will ever have a bad expose.



( hello to anyone on this forum reading this. i hope you are all in agreement that this was very low of the press to do. i have emailed my poem to a few news papers but i don't have much hope in seeing it in a paper as this wont get them the sensationalism as such as a photo would do. the question is - how low we they go ? - and if Kate was to read this - i hope she can see my support for her and i hope it makes her smile. i feel better now as
i have put in my 10 cents. but do you feel they have a right to print these photos? )

[Marcus.]

No I don't think so

[the truth]

Ive never known of a subject I cared less about. literally the speed my grass grows is of more immediate concern. the attention this trivial drivel gets compared to REAL news is disturbing and hints at how brainless mindless and dumbed down our society has become

[Livia]

Considering what the paps did to Diana... no.

[Pyramid*]

Regardless of how much she is in the media and of media interest, irrespective of her royal title: like anyone else in the public eye: she still has a right to privacy and this goes beyond what is acceptable.

[the truth]

Regardless of how much she is in the media and of media interest, irrespective of her royal title: like anyone else in the public eye: she still has a right to privacy and this goes beyond what is acceptable.

I hope the topless tribeswomen kate got photographed with yesterday also sue for millions (using tax payers money of course) its pitiful how much attention this drivelling story has had. people get killed all the time and it doesnt even make headlines, but a royal gets photographed topless and the world falls apart. grow up everyone

[Pyramid*]

I hope the topless tribeswomen kate got photographed with yesterday also sue for millions (using tax payers money of course) its pitiful how much attention this drivelling story has had. people get killed all the time and it doesnt even make headlines, but a royal gets photographed topless and the world falls apart. grow up everyone


Which part of the world is falling apart precisely?

The irony of you telling 'everyone' to grow up.....

[the truth]

Which part of the world is falling apart precisely?

The irony of you telling 'everyone' to grow up.....

most of it. i wont post on this trivial thread again , I dont want to encourage more mindless chatter about an outdated monarchical fiasco. Id rather pay attention to important matters, such as the shootings today, the murders in south wales too, the soldiers killed , also the reports than america has just had its best year ever of arms sales , £44 billion , sold to the likes of saudi arabia, egypt, israel etc now those are important news stories

[Pyramid*]

Ive never known of a subject I cared less about. literally the speed my grass grows is of more immediate concern. the attention this trivial drivel gets compared to REAL news is disturbing and hints at how brainless mindless and dumbed down our society has become

most of it. i wont post on this trivial thread again , I dont want to encourage more mindless chatter about an outdated monarchical fiasco. Id rather pay attention to important matters, such as the shootings today, the murders in south wales too, the soldiers killed , also the reports than america has just had its best year ever of arms sales , £44 billion , sold to the likes of saudi arabia, egypt, israel etc now those are important news stories

I am always amused by comments such as, "Couldn't care less ..." then I see the same person making post after post - about something they could not care less about.

Kate has a right to privacy, in her private time, on private land.

[Scarlett.]

No they don't she was on a private beach, and the neckbearded serial masturbator who took the photos had no right doing so.

[Mrluvaluva]

Somebody went to great pains to get these photos, and there was only one underlying self motivational force behind it. Greed.

[Pyramid*]

Somebody went to great pains to get these photos, and there was only one underlying self motivational force behind it. Greed.

So true. As has been reported: the increased revenue in sales will offset any maximum fine: and all this has done is give the whole thing even more publicity. Either way: a win win for 'Closer'.

The more alarming aspect is: so much for security - it could have been something far more lethal being shot other than pictures - mind you that's a whole different ball game altogether.

[Beso]

Considering what the paps did to Diana... no.

paps:dance:

[Alf]

it's only a chest, we've all got one.

[Beso]

it's only a chest, we've all got one.

she don't.:nono:

[Alf]

Considering what the paps did to Diana... no.****** diana, she was a disgrace to the royal family, and as a britain the monarchy stands for me and all britains, without the monarchy the prime minister would be a dictator, but because of the monarchy he the most powerful man in the country, has to bow down before the monarch. thats what makes britain great, and diana was a scab, out for her own glory.

[Sam:)]

No I dont think it should happen to anyone... But if this was Rihanna or Katy Perry, nobody would bat an eye. I think if your in the public eye you should be prepared for this

[Alf]

No I dont think it should happen to anyone... But if this was Rihanna or Katy Perry, nobody would bat an eye. I think if your in the public eye you should be prepared for this
to be fair rhianna and katy perry get their babs out to sell music, showing their bits off is their living, because good music today is about what you look like apparently.

[Kazanne]

No I dont think it should happen to anyone... But if this was Rihanna or Katy Perry, nobody would bat an eye. I think if your in the public eye you should be prepared for this

Rihanna and Katy Perry etc USE their sexuality to promote their careers,Kate was on a private holiday and does not flaunt herself,there is a massive difference,some perv just wanting to make money off this is disgusting,people are entitalled to privacy (if they want it)no matter who they are

[fruit_cake]

I'm not a fan of that kind of press but she can always renounce her crown if she doesn't like it.

[the truth]

****** diana, she was a disgrace to the royal family, and as a britain the monarchy stands for me and all britains, without the monarchy the prime minister would be a dictator, but because of the monarchy he the most powerful man in the country, has to bow down before the monarch. thats what makes britain great, and diana was a scab, out for her own glory.

she wasnt perfect, but are they? what makes you think the monarchy stands for britons? what on earth relevance do they have to anyones life? isnt their entire history one of brutal rape, theft, butchery, murder and war?

[fruit_cake]

there's still a whole lot of evidence that suggests the Royals had Lady D murdered. I wouldn't put it past them

[joeysteele]

There is no official legislation that says the press cannot print these sort of photos, only that there is an agreement that the Royals privacy is protected more than before following the bad treatment as to Diana.
I guess it comes down to morals and where do you end as to what can be printed anyway.

I think it ridiculous and also very dangerous for the press to and be allowed to, report that Harry is in Afghanistan again.
This happened abroad however and we have no control over what goes on there.

I agree it's wrong, I hate the press and media too for the devastation they can bring to peoples lives, they do need to report all sorts of things as to news but I never saw the need to print these photos anywhere.

I would say the press have a right to publish the photos because there is no legal ban on doing so, however I would say they have no 'moral' right to publish them but in the main what is 'moral' about the press and its activites now anyway.

[Alf]

she wasnt perfect, but are they? what makes you think the monarchy stands for britons? what on earth relevance do they have to anyones life? isnt their entire history one of brutal rape, theft, butchery, murder and war?
because of their history we are one of the most evovled countries in the world, if it wasn't for them you wouldn't live with the luxuries of life that you do.

but hey lets all say how great diana was, she did so much for the evolution of mankind

[Mystic Mock]

The Royal Family in the past was like brutal animals.

Anyway going on topic no the media should not be taking photos and printing them off to make money off it, there's bigger stuff going on in the world than something as trivial as this.

[Pyramid*]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/kate-middleton/9543118/Duchess-of-Cambridge-photos-row-French-privacy-law-is-strict-but-the-fines-are-paltry.html



Privacy rules are based on Article 9 of the Civil Code which states: “Everyone has the right to privacy”, which dates back to 1970.

This right, which became part of the constitution in 1995, includes not only the disclosure of a person's private life but also the unauthorised taking of photographs and their publication.


Protection for “the intimacy of private life” is bolstered by the article’s second paragraph, which enables a court to submit an interlocutory order to put a stop to violations of this right by whatever means.

The maximum criminal sentence for breaching private life or “fixing, recording or transmitting the image of a person in a private place without their consent” is a year’s imprisonment and a 45,000-euro fine.


“The law protecting people’s private lives, forbidding publishing photographs without their consent, is much stricter fashion than anywhere else in Europe,” said Jean-Luc Soulier, a lawyer specialising in defamation and privacy law. "

“But that doesn’t stop magazines like Closer or Voici from publishing such photos almost every week, as their circulation figures are so high that fines generally never go above a few tens of the thousands of euros. This is too weak to dissuade such magazines,” he said


there's your answer as far as the Law is concerned. do they have a right? No.

[fruit_cake]

I thought that there was also a law about people in public positions having less rights to privacy though. I could be wrong

[Me. I Am Salman]

absolutely no way

[Beso]

she wasnt perfect, but are they? what makes you think the monarchy stands for britons? what on earth relevance do they have to anyones life? isnt their entire history one of brutal rape, theft, butchery, murder and war?

isn't everyones:sad: