I'm glad all the countries all over the world are now publishing the photos.
Its outrageous that our tax payers money has been spent on solicitors for Kate to ban photographs just because she is smoking in the pictures and this ruins her public image.
We all know its not about the boobs as she was happy to wear nothing when she first got with William.
For revenge it would be good if they stopped taking any photos of these people.
They're stuffed in whatever way they play it. It's now a merrygoround in tat mags around the world.
presumably the frnch mag sold them on before the lawyers got to them? Unless these other countries have nicked images off the web, agree once out would be hard to stem
but i guess they had to make it clear it was out of order instead of ignoring i woukd have done the same no ratbag scum pap has any right to peep
presumably the frnch mag sold them on before the lawyers got to them? Unless these other countries have nicked images off the web, agree once out would be hard to stem
but i guess they had to make it clear it was out of order instead of ignoring i woukd have done the same no ratbag scum pap has any right to peep
The magazine may not have owned the copyright if they didn't commission the pictures to start with. As things currently stand, the photographer is free to do as s/he pleases with the pictures.
The magazine may not have owned the copyright if they didn't commission the pictures to start with. As things currently stand, the photographer is free to do as s/he pleases with the pictures.
The magazine may not have owned the copyright if they didn't commission the pictures to start with. As things currently stand, the photographer is free to do as s/he pleases with the pictures.
Quite. They will have to serve injuctions on anyone who says they are going to publish the pics & sue those that do it anway.
They're trying to take on the world media tat.. good luck with that.
Quite. They will have to serve injuctions on anyone who says they are going to publish the pics & sue those that do it anway.
They can only do that in a few countries that have strong privacy laws (such as France). In many other countries, the publication of such photos is perfectly legal.
presumably the frnch mag sold them on before the lawyers got to them?
As far as I know, the injunction only prohibits the publication of the photos in France. The magazine (or whoever owns the rights) can still sell them to foreign publications, which are not under such constraints.
As far as I know, the injunction only prohibits the publication of the photos in France. The magazine (or whoever owns the rights) can still sell them to foreign publications, which are not under such constraints.
no the judgement was they could not sell the photos to any other country
I'm glad all the countries all over the world are now publishing the photos.
Its outrageous that our tax payers money has been spent on solicitors for Kate to ban photographs just because she is smoking in the pictures and this ruins her public image.
We all know its not about the boobs as she was happy to wear nothing when she first got with William.
For revenge it would be good if they stopped taking any photos of these people.
What taxpayers money?
It's not the smoking that's the problem it's the invasion of privacy
no worries its confusing personally i think its a bury bad news things
Irans waters full of nato ships iran sent submarine eeeewwwww and not a jot on bbc news instead we are told by the presenters how sad it is badgers arebeing culled, yes, but....they DO know dont theythat everyones got sky and can listen to all the other news channels
Presumably the magazines in question will make a lot of money by printing them. That's why any magazine prints anything, isn't it? To make a profit.
With all the shi+tstorm surrounding these images, mainly in thanks to the Royals whipping up so much fuss, any publication containing the images is going to shift a few more copies.
I heard a good argument on the radio about this. If the two of them had said nothing at all about it then the images would have been out of the public eye by now. The couple could have claimed ignorance and simply said it wasn't them or that they didn't care and the pictures would have lost a lot of value.
That's easy for some people on the radio to say. but Kate and William clearly did care. They were unhappy about their privacy being invaded.
Good on them for speaking out and not sweeping the whole thing under the carpet and forgetting about it.
Shame the photos were published, and yes, I think people will buy the magazines mainly because of the controversy.
Sweden? Aren't we harboring one of their fugitives? The Queen should personally escort him to the airport and wave him off, then give the Swedes the finger for daring to expose her D-I-L
If you have a problem with living under a monarchy, you can move to another country, you know. Nobody is forcing you to pay for them, by choosing to live in Britain there is a tacit social contract about supporting the monarchy.
If you have a problem with living under a monarchy, you can move to another country, you know. Nobody is forcing you to pay for them, by choosing to live in Britain there is a tacit social contract about supporting the monarchy.
No there isn't. We claim to be a democracy, which means nothing about our governmental system is out of the reach of voters, including the nationalised celebrity clan.
If you have a problem with living under a monarchy, you can move to another country, you know. Nobody is forcing you to pay for them, by choosing to live in Britain there is a tacit social contract about supporting the monarchy.
That's a bullshine argument, are you on a deliberate gee-up, I suspect you are, it's just 'too' stupid an argument to be for real IMO.
Comments
Its outrageous that our tax payers money has been spent on solicitors for Kate to ban photographs just because she is smoking in the pictures and this ruins her public image.
We all know its not about the boobs as she was happy to wear nothing when she first got with William.
For revenge it would be good if they stopped taking any photos of these people.
but i guess they had to make it clear it was out of order instead of ignoring i woukd have done the same no ratbag scum pap has any right to peep
The magazine may not have owned the copyright if they didn't commission the pictures to start with. As things currently stand, the photographer is free to do as s/he pleases with the pictures.
I think that's the best one I've heard so far.
Shame it's got a very short shelf life as a joke.
Quite. They will have to serve injuctions on anyone who says they are going to publish the pics & sue those that do it anway.
They're trying to take on the world media tat.. good luck with that.
They can only do that in a few countries that have strong privacy laws (such as France). In many other countries, the publication of such photos is perfectly legal.
As far as I know, the injunction only prohibits the publication of the photos in France. The magazine (or whoever owns the rights) can still sell them to foreign publications, which are not under such constraints.
I see. Thanks!
Closer could not sell it on but the copyright owner which may not be Closer can do as they please.
Thinking about it, was/is the legal action against Closer worth it? Seems to be counter-productive.
What taxpayers money?
It's not the smoking that's the problem it's the invasion of privacy
err we pay for the whole bunch of freeloaders
no worries its confusing personally i think its a bury bad news things
Irans waters full of nato ships iran sent submarine eeeewwwww and not a jot on bbc news instead we are told by the presenters how sad it is badgers arebeing culled, yes, but....they DO know dont theythat everyones got sky and can listen to all the other news channels
Well, that would explain the stampede to buy the 3 French copies on sale near me. (London)
That's easy for some people on the radio to say. but Kate and William clearly did care. They were unhappy about their privacy being invaded.
Good on them for speaking out and not sweeping the whole thing under the carpet and forgetting about it.
Shame the photos were published, and yes, I think people will buy the magazines mainly because of the controversy.
...
If she wanted to do that, why not whip them out at a public function or have a "wardrobe malfunction"?
Why go to the trouble of renting a private estate in a quiet part of France with security on site?
Honestly, it's like thinking this through was too much for you to do.
If you have a problem with living under a monarchy, you can move to another country, you know. Nobody is forcing you to pay for them, by choosing to live in Britain there is a tacit social contract about supporting the monarchy.
Prince William and his wife don't receive any money from the civil list
We don't have a constitution, which is why they said tacit.
That's a bullshine argument, are you on a deliberate gee-up, I suspect you are, it's just 'too' stupid an argument to be for real IMO.