Message Forums

think  you are missing the point lockie, its not about her having a pair of t*ts, ive even got some and im not royal !

fact is, they have a right to privacy and its about people, namely the paparazzi, having the respect to know when theyve gone too far.

how would you feel if you n your partner were having some "private" time n then next thing you know, your partner's t*ts are splashed all over the front page of a magazine,WITHOUT yours or their permission?

what job they do is totally irrelavant.

An the competition for this week is

What is worse, an invasion of your privacy by

a. some photographer half a mile away with a really powerful lens taking pictures of you in your private garden

b. Publication of very private pictures of you for the titilation of men across Europe

c. Your private life being discussed on the Internet, or

d. Derogatory/disrespectful statements on the internet about your appearance/looks especially if you are a woman

the winner will receive their own personal copy of clause 5 of the Defamation Bill so that when it becomes law you are right up to speed with do's and don'ts on the internet.

Phil

Quote: Originally posted by Angef on 17/9/2012

---

think  you are missing the point lockie, its not about her having a pair of t*ts, ive even got some and im not royal !

fact is, they have a right to privacy and its about people, namely the paparazzi, having the respect to know when theyve gone too far.

how would you feel if you n your partner were having some "private" time n then next thing you know, your partner's t*ts are splashed all over the front page of a magazine,WITHOUT yours or their permission?

what job they do is totally irrelavant.

---

what I think quite interesting about this post is that it was only posted at 10.19am  on 14th sept and already clocked up 2362 views at 16.40pm today but only 68 replies so who were all the perverts out there hoping to see the actual pics here lol

My view is that the photo's taken by a pervy peeping Tom  shouldn't have been printed

Quote: Originally posted by romany on 17/9/2012

---

Had a bit of a problem at our village fete as a photographer was taking pictures of all the children in a fancy dress comp he then tried to sell them to parents and the local rag
people got angry and got a solicitor involved he was told it was illegal to sell or publish without a model release form but not illegal for him to have photographed them.
All that info came second hand so don't know if thats all fact or faction

---

Kate and Will, were on private property.  Could not be seen by the general public, never mind take photos.  Therefore not in the same league, as someone sunbathing topless on the beach.

Only someone with a powerful telescopic photo lens would be able to take photos.

Maybe a member of the public, who enjoy star gazing and own a powerful telescope could have spotted them.

The photographer is in hiding at the moment.  I don't know why, as noone has revealed the identity, as the papers are not obliged to reaveal the identity.

If the papers think if they could get way with publishing these photos.   Next time photos published could be more explicit.   High payment is the driving force.

heath63.

Quote: Originally posted by TheFishesThree on 18/9/2012

---

We are inclined to agree with Tartanthistles comment at 4:41pm 17/9/12. There's an extraordinarily high number of posts and viewers on this thread compared to some others that might be considered more worthy of our mental efforts and contribution to help people with their problems. That's worrying. It's just smut after all.

---