This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/world/europe/french-court-rebukes-closer-magazine-for-photos-of-kate-middleton.html

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
French Court Rebukes Magazine for Photos of Royal Couple French Court Rebukes Magazine for Photos of Royal Couple
(about 1 hour later)
PARIS — A French court on Tuesday rebuked the magazine Closer for publishing “particularly intrusive” photographs of the Duchess of Cambridge, the former Kate Middleton, ordering its publisher to cease all publication, distribution or sales of the pictures, and to hand over all digital copies of the images to the royal family.PARIS — A French court on Tuesday rebuked the magazine Closer for publishing “particularly intrusive” photographs of the Duchess of Cambridge, the former Kate Middleton, ordering its publisher to cease all publication, distribution or sales of the pictures, and to hand over all digital copies of the images to the royal family.
But the judgment had already been outpaced by the Internet and the international gossip press, which have brought the grainy photos of the Duchess to readers and viewers the world over. And the ruling, in response to a lawsuit brought by the duchess and her husband, Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, appeared unlikely to prevent the continuing dissemination of the photos online or elsewhere. But the judgment had already been outpaced by the Internet and the international gossip press, which have brought the grainy photos of the duchess to readers and viewers across the globe.
The ruling, in response to a lawsuit by the duchess and her husband, was a victory for the couple’s legal battle to protect their privacy but was unlikely to hamper the continuing dissemination of the photos. The ruling was a response to a lawsuit brought by the duchess and her husband, Prince William, Duke of Cambridge. The court ruled that the photographs, taken while the couple was vacationing at a private villa in the south of France, had violated the duchess’s rights to privacy and image control. The publisher, Mondadori Magazines France, owned by the former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, was also ordered to pay the couple about $2,600 to cover legal fees. Additional penalties will be assessed each day the publisher does not relinquish its digital copies of the photographs.
The court ruled that the photographs, taken while the couple was vacationing at a private villa in the south of France, had violated the duchess’s rights to privacy and image control. The publisher, Mondadori Magazines France, owned by the former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, was also ordered to pay the couple about $2,600 to cover legal fees. Additional penalties will be assessed each day the publisher does not relinquish its digital copies of the photographs. Another fine could follow the initial ruling, but would be unlikely to be in excess of several thousand euros.
In a terse statement, the duke and duchess announced that they “welcome the judge’s ruling.”In a terse statement, the duke and duchess announced that they “welcome the judge’s ruling.”
The editor of Closer did not respond to several requests for comment on the ruling, but the magazine has argued that the photographs were taken from a public road and, in a statement last week, said that they were “in no case degrading.”The editor of Closer did not respond to several requests for comment on the ruling, but the magazine has argued that the photographs were taken from a public road and, in a statement last week, said that they were “in no case degrading.”
The couple was apparently photographed with a telephoto lens while sunbathing at a private home in Provence this month. The couple was photographed with a Telephoto lens while sunbathing at a private home in Provence this month.
In its ruling, the court, in the city of Nanterre, wrote, “These shots, which divulge the intimacy of a couple, partially naked on the terrace of a private residence surrounded by a large park, several hundred meters from a road open to the public, and which could legitimately be supposed to be hidden from prying eyes, are of a particularly intrusive nature.”In its ruling, the court, in the city of Nanterre, wrote, “These shots, which divulge the intimacy of a couple, partially naked on the terrace of a private residence surrounded by a large park, several hundred meters from a road open to the public, and which could legitimately be supposed to be hidden from prying eyes, are of a particularly intrusive nature.”
French law is highly protective of privacy, lawyers say, treating certain invasions of private life as criminal matters. In addition to the civil complaint decided Tuesday, the duke and duchess filed a criminal suit. The prosecutor in Nanterre opened a judicial investigation into the criminal case on Tuesday, according to a spokeswoman. That investigation will seek, in part, to identify the photographer, whom Closer has identified only as someone who has worked frequently with the magazine. French law is highly protective of privacy, lawyers say, treating certain invasions of private life as criminal matters. In addition to the civil complaint decided Tuesday, the duke and duchess filed a criminal suit. The prosecutor in Nanterre opened a judicial investigation into the criminal case on Tuesday, according to a spokeswoman. That investigation will seek, in part, to identify the photographer.
Closer published the photographs last week, including three on the cover of the magazine over an English-language headline reading, “Oh My God!” In a sub-headline, the magazine correctly predicted that the photographs would “go around the world.” The photographs have already appeared in print in Ireland and in Italy, and have been reproduced extensively on the Internet. The royal couple is weighing legal action against the Irish and Italian publications, The Irish Daily Star and the glossy Italian magazine Chi, also owned by Mr. Berlusconi, a royal spokeswoman said.
The photographs have already appeared in print in Ireland and in Italy, and have been reproduced extensively on the Internet. The royal couple is weighing legal action against the Irish and Italian publications, the Irish Daily Star and the glossy Italian magazine Chi, also owned by Mr. Berlusconi, a royal spokeswoman said.
The couple’s office has called the publication of the photographs “grotesque and totally unjustifiable” and has compared them to the “worst excesses of the press and paparazzi during the life of Diana, Princess of Wales,” the prince’s mother, who was killed in a Paris car crash while being pursued by paparazzi in 1997.The couple’s office has called the publication of the photographs “grotesque and totally unjustifiable” and has compared them to the “worst excesses of the press and paparazzi during the life of Diana, Princess of Wales,” the prince’s mother, who was killed in a Paris car crash while being pursued by paparazzi in 1997.
Lawsuits for invasion of privacy are filed frequently against media companies in France, and magazines are often ordered to publish notices that they have been tried and convicted. Valérie Trierweiler, the companion of President François Hollande and a journalist at Paris Match magazine, sued several magazines this summer for publishing images of her and Mr. Hollande in swimwear at the beach.Lawsuits for invasion of privacy are filed frequently against media companies in France, and magazines are often ordered to publish notices that they have been tried and convicted. Valérie Trierweiler, the companion of President François Hollande and a journalist at Paris Match magazine, sued several magazines this summer for publishing images of her and Mr. Hollande in swimwear at the beach.
The financial penalties from such suits are typically small, often just a few thousand dollars, said Christophe Bigot, a media attorney in Paris, while the potential gains in publicity and increased circulation can be significant. Nor did the ruling seem likely to deter similar intrusions of privacy in the future, given that the decision was “banal” and to be expected, Mr. Bigot said.The financial penalties from such suits are typically small, often just a few thousand dollars, said Christophe Bigot, a media attorney in Paris, while the potential gains in publicity and increased circulation can be significant. Nor did the ruling seem likely to deter similar intrusions of privacy in the future, given that the decision was “banal” and to be expected, Mr. Bigot said.
Closer has not disclosed sales numbers for the issue featuring the duchess, but copies of the offending edition have reportedly sold for as much as $45 on the Internet auction site eBay. On Tuesday, eBay announced a ban on the sale of that issue.
Foreign celebrities may be viewed as particularly ripe targets for French tabloids, however. Foreigners are less likely to sue than French citizens, Mr. Bigot said, “either because they don’t know their rights, or because they feel the sums involved are not compelling.”