What do you make of this?
JK Rowling, author of the Harry Potter books, took exception to a newspaper publishing a picture of her 20-month-old son as she pushed him along in his buggy on a public street. But her case was thrown out. According to the judge:
"The law does not in my judgment (as it stands) allow them to carve out a press-free zone for their children in respect of absolutely everything they choose to do."
As a picture agency, our natural reaction might be one of jubiliation. Freedom of the press and all that. But really it's not. Whether it's legal or not... whether you can justify publication because the article was about motherhood... and leaving aside the issue of the long lens and surreptious methods used to take the photo... there is, in our view, simply something distasteful about publishing unsolicited pictures of celebrities' children.
Sure, there are grey areas but we took the decision from day one not to handle pics of kids. We haven't changed our position (see here). Your thoughts?