one get a patent
A service of Sir Elton John to prevent the Daily Mail to publish a photo of him walking with his driver from his car to his London house was approved by the High Court when Sir Elton was successful in obtaining this arrangement, it is totally revolutionized British newspapers and magazines of the practice.
Sir Elton had his picture from a freelance photographer while walking to his Rolls Royce to the fore his gate West London home. He heard that the Daily Mail was planning to publish the picture, and he sought an injunction to prevent the publication on the grounds that it is an unwarranted infringement of privacy. The picture showed him dressed casually, but he complained that he had showed his baldness.
In his request, Sir Elton claimed that the photo in question, which was purchased secretly, without the consent was that do not contribute to all issues of public interest, and their publication would be a breach of the Press Complaints Commission. It supports with his offer the decision of the European Court of Human Rights at the Hannover v Germany [2004] ECHR, where Princess Caroline of Monaco. It was in this case, that their right to a private family life have been violated through sustainable paparazzi photographs of her and her children.
Another case, this situation highlights Campbell v MgN to the supermodel Naomi Campbell. The House of Lords awarded her damages and against the Mirror for breach of trust in relation to the publication of photographs of her outside a Narcotics Anonymous meeting. It was stressed that the activity photographed must be private. With reference to Naomi Campbell, Lady Hale, said:
"The reader will naturally be interested to see how it looks, if and when it appears to the shops for a bottle of milk. There is nothing in essence to that private information and can also be expected to damage her private life . It may not be a high order backlog of freedom of speech, but there is nothing to justify it, it disturbs. "
Sir Elton is the first case in which the contradiction between from Hanover / Germany, and Campbell v MgN was before the court. The question in this case was:
Has Sir Elton has an expectation of privacy in relation to the information in the photos, and if he did, his right to respect for his privacy "greater than" the right to freedom of expression "?
Sir Elton application for an injunction by the High Court on the grounds that the photograph, the Daily Mail, will be published later, not in any way personal information, for example in Sir Elton's health or his sexual relations.
Comment: The court also highlighted the fact that the Princess Caroline case involved an element of harassment by the photographers, the suffering, as they are about their daily business. This factor was not included in Sir Elton request. This decision for Sir Elton means that when a celebrity photo is displayed in a public place, his / her lack of consent can not prevent their publication. It should be a special element to the court the question of privacy.
Please contact us for further information on media law enquiries@rtcoopers.com
Visit http://www.rtcoopers.com/practice_mediaentertainment.php
© RT Coopers, 2006. This background information is not a comprehensive or complete statement of the law on the issues can not be considered legal advice. It is only on general issues. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in relation to the particular circumstances.
Full-service commercial law firm based in the City of London, specializing in biotechnology law, Employment Lawyers, media lawyers, Entertainment Solicitors, Pharmaceutical Lawyers, Intellectual Property Law, Litigation, Corporate Finance, Copyright, Redundancies, Commercial Lawyers, Commercial Law, Commercial Contracts, privacy, property lawyers. Visit http://www.rtcoopers.com/practice_mediaentertainment.php
0 ความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น