Anti-Paparazzi Law Proposed - 'Britney's Law'

Login  |  Join Now (FREE)!
Trend Spotting, Cool Hunting, and Innovation Trends
    New (50+/Day)    Tech    Fashion    Sex    Pop Culture    Celebs    Business    Eco    Art & Design    Bizarre    [+/-]
   

CAN YOU GUESS WHAT'S NEXT?

Next Trend

[More Choice]

mediterranean
On: Feb 13, 08
356 Trends
105 Comments


Anti-Paparazzi Law Proposed - 'Britney's Law' [Edit]




Anti-Paparazzi Law Proposed - 'Britney's Law' 1,600 Views - Click for Larger Image

With the recent drama surrounding Britney Spears, the world’s awareness was raised concerning the issue of how close paparazzi can get to the celebrity and how far they could push the privacy and public safety envelope. It was 11 years ago when Princess Diana died of severe injuries from a fatal car accident that was surrounded by paparazzi controversy. Now the authorities are seeking a new law, being dubbed ‘Britney’s Law’, that would prevent similar tragedies and give celebrities the chance of a somehow normal life.

The L.A. City Council is considering an ordinance that would impose a 20-yard “personal safety bubble” around those public figures in the city who are construed by the law to be “paparazzi targets.” If the proposed Britney Law is implemented, it will be the most stringent anti-paparazzi legislation of its kind to date. If a paparazzo crosses the 20-yard “personal safety bubble” without permission, the city will confiscate all profits from any resulting photograph.

The proposal raises a host of thorny legal issues, most notably, the First Amendment right of the press to facilitate communication of information to the public. We can surely expect the multi-million paparazzi industry to put up a big fight.





Via: newsmax  


Bookmark
Embed This Trend
Send to a Friend
RSS Feed







Add this to Your
Trend Portfolio
Collect Favorites, Add Comments,
Submit Trends and Earn Money
Trends


Comments:


I like the idea behind this law. I mean, I can't even stand when my husband takes up too much space on our bed! Coulnd't imagine what it would be like to have a bunch of strangers flahsing pictures at your face! I hope this law goes into effect.

By: macoROCKS on Feb 14, 08 | 4 Trends | 23 Comments

Not in the U.S. Restricting the rights of the free press is a big no-no. And I sure hope it stays that way. If this goes for Britney, it will apply next to criminals, then politicians. Slippery slope.

By: Going Like Sixty on Feb 14, 08 | 2274 Trends | 434 Comments

I hardly think the paparazzi qualify as 'free press'. Reporting is one thing, flashing a 100 lights in someones face while hes getting in his car and driving, then following them in high speed is inviting tragedy, not reporting.

By: Ayman Helweh on Feb 14, 08 | 1679 Trends | 909 Comments

I agree with ayMan. Plus reporting on criminals and politicians news, can not in my opinion, be compared, or put in the same light, as following a Hollywood star around, on their girls night out! I think the "free press" already fell down the slippery slope on this so called "free reporting".

By: macoROCKS on Feb 15, 08 | 4 Trends | 23 Comments

I think its about time something like this came into effect. Freedom of press in this situation is taken too far. We as a public (if interested in some shots they get) are that bored that we feel compelled to know when a celebrity went to the bathroom etc, then shame on us. Freedom of press in any regards needs to be looked into. My husband and I was in a one car crash (no alcohol or drugs involved) that ended up killing my husband at the scene, it was not 5 minutes and news cameras surrounded the scene flashing pictures etc. For days all over the news and the papers they had the picture of my husbands body laying (though covered with the imfamous black bag) on the gurney being wheeled to the coroners van. This pic was also shown with one of him layin on the ground covered except for his shoes. All anyone needed to know was he died, there was no sense in showing his dead body, just for the cameramans "wow factor" to attempt to win "props" for his coverage.

By: Terri on Mar 11, 08 | 0 Trends | 1 Comments

@Terri: Restricting freedom of the press is like being a "little bit pregnant." You either have complete unfettered freedom of the press or you don't. You felt that taking pictures of a body bag was wrong. I don't see the problem. It's news. Sounds to me like the photographers were aware of the pain showing your husband outside the body bag could cause. Don't forget, these decisions are made by producers and editors. I bet there was a photo of your husband before he was bagged. "Freedom of the press needs to be looked into" is a silly emotional statement.

By: Going Like Sixty on Mar 11, 08 | 2274 Trends | 434 Comments

I am with ya all the way Terri. Not everything has to be extreme, either allow freedom of press or block it. Any profession needs regulations and control, from doctors to lawyers. And the state and nature of press and paparazzi has dramatically changed in the last 10 years, which calls for a review and re-thinking of the laws. Sometimes we hold ideals high, but when you are the subject of scrutiny you see under a different light.

By: Ayman Helweh on Mar 12, 08 | 1679 Trends | 909 Comments

Terri...So sorry for your loss. I guess you can rest assured that what goes around comes around...one day, all of those shallow a-holes will get that same kind of treatment they gave you and your husband and that very emotional time. Too bad you could shove their cameras up their butts...it seems to me that if paparazzi are able/allowed and somehow entitled to totally invade your privacy at THE MOST inappropriate times, that you shouldn't be able to freely express yourself violently against them. I say, we either regulate the whole paparazzi thing OR we totally un-regulate meaning, we get to get away we reacting freely (and maybe violently) towards these scummy paparazzis.

By: macoROCKS on Mar 15, 08 | 4 Trends | 23 Comments

@macroROCKS & AyMan: shove it up WHO's butt? Time, People, Guardian, LaMonde, etc? Who decides? Rethink a law that is the foundation on which the U.S. was built? Who rethinks it? Who defines the parameters? Free press is FREE. Not "kinda" free. One of the first things dictators do is seize the media to stop the free flow of information. For a democracy to succeed there must be robust and unfettered discussion. Anything less and the U.S. is headed to anarchy.

By: Going Like Sixty on Mar 15, 08 | 2274 Trends | 434 Comments



Latest Trends Newsletter
Latest Trends Newsletter
trend newsletter
Trends RSS Feed
Trend Hunter Toolbar

Latest Trends RSS TREND HUNTER is the world's largest trend spotting and cool hunting community. It is an explosion of cool, fueled by a global network of trend spotters and cool hunters. Innovation and strategic advantage hinge on the ability to anticipate the latest trends and identify the next big thing, like this post about, "britneys law." By tracking the evolution of cool, Trend Hunters generate ideas, stimulate creativity, and ultimately unlock cool.

About Us   Trends   Trend Reports   RSS (98 Flavors)   Innovation Keynotes   Tips / Contact     Join
0.3637
Trends and Content Copyright © TREND HUNTER Inc. All Rights Reserved.