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.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Privacy
Date: 2008-07-24 09:22 pm (UTC)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.