Comment
0
Tweet
0
Print
RSS Feeds

Paul Weller's children win lawsuit over pictures

Wednesday - 4/16/2014, 8:54am  ET

FILE - In this Saturday, June 29, 2013 file photo, British musician Paul Weller performs at the Hard Rock Calling Festival in the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, London. Paul Weller has won a privacy lawsuit against a newspaper that published paparazzi pictures of the singer's children. The former front man of The Jam and The Style Council sued Associated Newspapers over images of his daughter Dylan and twin sons John Paul and Bowie that appeared on its MailOnline website. Dylan was 16 and the twins 10 months old when the pictures, taken during a shopping trip in Santa Monica, were published in 2012. Judge James Dingemans ruled Wednesday that although publishing the pictures was legal in California, they "were published in circumstances where Dylan, Bowie and John Paul had a reasonable expectation of privacy." He awarded a total of 10,000 pounds ($17,000) to the children. MailOnline said it was "deeply disappointed" by the ruling and intended to appeal. (Photo by Jonathan Short/Invision/AP, file)

LONDON (AP) -- The children of musician Paul Weller won a privacy lawsuit Wednesday over paparazzi pictures published on a newspaper website.

Lawyers for the former front man of The Jam and his family sued Associated Newspapers over images of daughter Dylan and twin sons John Paul and Bowie that appeared on its MailOnline site.

Dylan was 16 and the twins 10 months old when the pictures, taken during a shopping trip in Santa Monica, were published in 2012.Judge James Dingemans ruled that although publishing the pictures was legal in California, they "were published in circumstances where Dylan, Bowie and John Paul had a reasonable expectation of privacy" -- a status protected in British human rights law.

He awarded a total of 10,000 pounds ($17,000) to the children.

Paul Weller told the High Court in London that the photographer was asked to stop but persisted, "taking photos of a very frightened 16-year-old holding her baby brother."

"What kind of person is that anyway?" he said.

MailOnline said it was "deeply disturbed" by the judgment and would appeal.

It said it was in competition with U.S-based websites protected by the First Amendment, and called the privacy ruling "a worrying development in our law, as it has conferred unfettered image rights on all the children."


Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.