The royal couple's celebration of an injunction granted by a French court, designed to prevent further publication of topless photos of the Duchess of Cambridge, seems likely to be short-lived. In this digital age, images cross frontiers at a velocity mere injunctions can't match.
The details of the story are familiar enough. William and Kate were holidaying at a private château, when photographs of the Duchess sunbathing on a terrace were taken, apparently from some distance away, and using a telephoto lens. Some 200 photographs are rumored to exist. A French magazine, Closer, published a relatively small selection. More have since been published by Italian and Irish magazines.
As soon as the story broke, the palace lurched into action with all the agility and relevance of a sauropod (that's a slow-moving dinosaur, to save Googling). They brought legal action against the first magazine to publish the pictures, and won a judgment preventing the magazine from re-publishing them, hosting them on its Website, or distributing them by any means.
Some reports even suggest that the photographs are to be "returned" to the royals -- as if they owned them in the first place. I suppose the content represents, in some figurative way, stolen property. One might think we are dealing with a set of priceless daguerrotypes or gelatin silver prints. Perhaps one might return them as one might return the famously stolen painting "The Concert" by Jan Vermeer.
Of course, it's precisely not physical photographs we're dealing with here, but images -- digital images -- as the palace seems painfully slow to realize. Privacy is a value which most of us -- notwithstanding Mark Zuckerberg's strictures -- would wish to defend. At the same time, once images are loose in the wild, rounding them up is bound to be just about impossible.
Apart from the continuing publication of the photos by magazines against which no injunction has yet been sought, it's necessary to recognize that images, once uploaded to the Internet, are readily downloaded by anyone and everyone, and can be uploaded again at any time. Anyone who is interested has probably clicked to see these photos already. They can be seen today, and it's unlikely -- short of a Web meltdown -- that they will ever vanish.
Perhaps, it might be argued, William and Kate are playing a longer game. Its legal maneuvers send a warning shot that publications will not profit from intruding on their privacy. One response is that, as far as the world outside the "Commonwealth Realm" is concerned, Kate Middleton is just a celebrity. As the editor of the Irish Daily Star said: "The Duchess would be no different to any other celeb pics we would get in, for example Rihanna or Lady Gaga."
Nevermind privacy -- the age of deference is over.
Also, it's unlikely that the risk of an injunction after the fact makes publishing such pictures less financially attractive. The French court has imposed a fine of some $13,000 a day if Closer magazine does not comply with the injunction (it doubtless will). Yet Closer anticipates doubling its sales with the Middleton photo edition.
There's a lesson for all of us in this, especially when it comes to making casual contribtions to social platforms like Twitter and Facebook. No matter how limited you think circulation of your posts and images will be -- and no matter what privacy controls you impose on your Facebook page -- the Internet is the best tool ever invented for copying and distributing content. Once it's out there, it's out there.
Also, as Prince Harry learned the hard way last month, think twice about doing anything in private that you wouldn't be willing to do in public. Harsh? That's the world we now live in.
Speaking of awkward positions, I'm afraid the slow drip of intrusive pictures has continued. The law really is toothless in cases like this. Again, it's like the English high court trying to enforce a gagging order after the information they sought to suppress has been posted on Twitter. You can punish one or two people, but you can't put the cat back in the bag.
The fuss could also just be a way to keep their names in the news. There's sure to be many who will take the side of the Royals and cheer them on in any attempt to go after the press. Making them look like heroes can't all be bad. But one wonders how they got themselves into the awkward postion in the first place.
it looks like such things as common sense and decency. And I still think there is a difference between Lady Gaga and the Royal family members, since the success of the first one demands some crazy pictures publishing, while the royal family doesn't really need publicity THAT much
Most of these motions by the royal family are just maneuvers to try and show that they're unpleased. They know they have no power, but they're trying to influence others into not showing these pictures.
Yes, it's hard to see what good the archaic legal manoeuvring did. Arguably it drew more attention to the pictures -- but that wasn't really necessary. It did nothing to stop their circulation. A law requiring the initial publisher to disgorge profits might have some teeth, but I don't know that there is any such law.
I was going to say Kate should grin and bear it...but...you know, I hate puns.
Kim, when one makes their living out of public appearances, they should be careful about how they appear in public.
Publishing those pictures apparently is illegal in France. But it is ridiculous not to take proper precautions and then look to the legal system for redress.
In Calfornia, a pedestrian has the right of way on a city street. That doesn't mean that it is a good idea for me to walk into a street without looking for oncoming vehicles.
From what I've read, the couple do their best to keep security intrusion on their lives to a minimum. They always have a detail with them, but I think they would discourage the kind of micro-management of their environment which might have prevented this. Swings and roundabouts.
If the French court had ruled for the photographer/publisher, then it would have raised the spectre of Diana and the paparazzi in Paris fifteen years ago. It was a smart political move for the French court to order the pictures returned.
The photos are on the Internet and will never go away, so Kate's victory is very hollow. However, Kate feels her honor has been restored. Not a big deal that the photographers/publishers have to pay an additional tax (the fine) on their earnings. Overall, everybody wins.
I don't think Kate has an expectation of privacy when she can be viewed from a public vantage point. Irregardless of the technology used. The fact that her minders are not cognizant of the range of current photographic equipment and they didn't do a good job sweeping the area for threats should be their problem, and their responsibility only.
The French court decided it was illegal. I think it would probably be illegal here in the States, depending on whether the couple had a "reasonable expectation" of privacy. But it strikes me as a murky area. Parading nude on a private hotel balcony in clear view of the street -- presumably no such expectation. Does the expectation really kick in when you're x yards away, despite the existence of long-distance cameras?
Ariella - Yes, I think the royal minders should anticipate planes flying overhead to take pictures. And drones. And whatever other technology the paparazzi can get their hands on.
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
Extending existing US wiretap laws to give federal agencies easier backdoor access to Internet communications -- especially real-time P2P services like VoIP -- will give, not only aid and comfort, but also technical assistance, to the country's enemies. Not to mention cyberthieves.
When David E. Sanger of The New York Times broke the news that the United States was responsible for the Stuxnet malware exploit against Iran's nuclear program, Senator John McCain accused the administration of deliberately leaking the story to enhance President Obama's national security record.
The Gamma Group's business of supplying surveillance technology exclusively for use by government agencies may be legitimate. But not when it poses as the popular, free, open-source web browser Firefox.
Yesterday's hack of the official Associated Press Twitter feed demonstrated the enormous risk attached to the platform's lazy, single factor approach to security.
The Murdoch/News International scandal has all the elements of the digital age, from phone-hacking through embarrassing emails to agile digital reporting.
Facebook's Graph Search may face some profound challenges and risks, first, because Facebook users haven't been thinking of their posts as product reviews; and second, because Facebook will now have to contend with the social-network equivalent of SEO "gaming" of results.
The new UltraViolet online DRM model has people upset, but the question we should ask ourselves is whether we want a flexible model to harmonize content owner and content consumer rights, or a one-takes-all model that probably results in less online content.
Michael Brutsch, a.k.a. Reddit's Violentacrez, is a creep who posted borderline kiddie porn to the Internet anonymously, and got fired when outed by a media outlet. It's a cautionary tale even for people who aren't jerks and predators.
Marissa Mayer at Yahoo has come out with her strategy on turning the company around: culture, company, calibration, and compensation. But Yahoo needs to have a technical approach to the mobile cloud opportunity, not a management theory lesson.
Companies are still getting their feet wet with social networking and what employees should and shouldn't broadcast. But they don't always involve HR and PR. Here's why they should, and what they risk when they don't.
New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority is conducting a pilot test of digital kiosks to guide subway users to where they want to go more efficiently and at lower cost.
The whole Amazon.reader debate is a double-stupid. It's stupid to think that there's any e-book buyer who doesn't know Amazon's URL, and it was stupider to let ICANN launch the whole free-form TLD initiative to start with.
While NFC's original goal was to enhance mobile commerce applications, it is finding its way into a number of other uses, which is creating both opportunity as well as challenges for IT departments.
Enterprises would like to move to cloud computing but are hesitant because they are concerned about providers’ ability to secure company data. Here are some tips that help to ensure that if breaches occur, the business is not left holding the bag.
Edmunds separates customers into segments based on the info it collects on its site and from partners, and uses that to push out custom content, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
The automotive website uses propensity modeling to target ads and customer registration forms, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
Ushering in a new era of cognitive computing systems, IBM announced today the IBM Watson Engagement Advisor, a technology breakthrough that allows brands to crunch big data in record time to transform the way they engage clients in key functions such as customer service, marketing, and sales.
Expert Integrated Systems: Changing the Experience & Economics of IT In this e-book, we take an in-depth look at these expert integrated systems -- what they are, how they work, and how they have the potential to help CIOs achieve dramatic savings while restoring IT's role as business innovator. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
Email This
