A victory for moral and decent people everywhere

[angelophile]

So, famous son-of-a-NAZI, Max Mosley, 68, has won his privacy case against the News of the World in the high courts.

This is the privacy case where he went to court and admitted under oath to hiring five prostitutes, who dressed in leather S&M uniforms and roleplayed being prison guards and spoke to him in German and dominated him, chaining him up and subjecting to a mock medical examination, including a check for lice, and caning him so hard that they drew blood and he had to, apparently, wear sticking plaster on his arse for several days afterward (a detail which just adds colour).

Well, that's a real victory for privacy right there.

I can sleep sound tonight knowing that such morally upstanding members of the community retain their right to privacy. The fact that Mosley went to court and publicly admitted to doing all these things doesn't show how much he values his privacy in any way. Not at all.

Comments

[kirke-novak.livejournal.com]

Well, in all fairness, I don't know that dude but being a son of a nazi definitely screwed him up enough to say that this is a punishment enough.

Privacy

[happy-hacker.livejournal.com]

It's always the corner case whack-jobs who test the rules of privacy. The fact that he won IS a victory for the privacy of normal people. If Mosley's privacy can be ignored, it means there's no hard and fast line protecting yours. Which is the same as no line at all.

-Jim

Re: Privacy

[angelophile.livejournal.com]

Actually, the privacy laws that exist already would pretty much cover me. Nobody in their right mind could say that I was a public figure, so that couldn't be argued and any story like this one wouldn't see print. The newspaper argued that Mosley is an elected official and in the public eye, so he is a public figure.

Mosley also argued his life had been ruined by the story and "totally devastating" to his wife of 48 years and "humiliating" for his two sons. My cynicism calls me to point out that, no, it was hiring five prostitutes for an S&M orgy and his actions which had that effect.

This isn't a landmark case and doesn't set any hard and fast line - in fact it does the opposite - the awards given were relatively small given the details of the story. Now in future when celebrities sue for invasion of privacy, their cases will be compared to Mosley's and most likely draw much lower damages if it's something less graphic.

And it just strikes me as ironic that the sheer amount of graphic detail that came out in the court case is being described as avictory for privacy.

Re: Privacy

[happy-hacker.livejournal.com]

All valid points. IMHO such magazines prey on the fact that to sue them, you wind up putting into public record exactly the things you're suing them for making public. And I suppose it's a valid question of which is thte worst:

1. Not knowing your husband/father is a kinky pervert.
2. Knowing your husband/father is a kinky pervert, but keeping it a secret.
3. Knowing everyone else knows your husband/father is a kinky pervert too.

Mosley clearly casts his vote on the matter.

-Jim