Someone explain to me why individuals like smelly sock cameraman here shouldn't be thoroughly re-educated against their will. Do they have some fundamental right to continue being tolerated the way they are?
Someone explain to me why individuals like smelly sock cameraman here shouldn't be thoroughly re-educated against their will. Do they have some fundamental right to continue being tolerated the way they are?
AFAIK they aren't breaking any laws so there isn't much that can be done. The best anyone can hope for is them getting sued to oblivion for slander though I'm no legal expert so idk if that's even possible.
Someone explain to me why individuals like smelly sock cameraman here shouldn't be thoroughly re-educated against their will. Do they have some fundamental right to continue being tolerated the way they are?
It's back to the rule about 'freedom of press'. The troublesome thing about that is that press are given a high degree of immunity from nation's laws unless they touched on things deemed state secrets; which is why we can have slanderous articles published against celebrities with little to even no consequences to the publisher should it be proven fake news---just look at Johnny Depp's case.
In paparazzi's case, they are protected under that same law: as long as they don't cause direct, physical or mental harm to the subject they are free to do their thing unless they overstepped their boundaries. There's laws against photographing the child of actor/ess, trespassing on their property etc. to help curb these photographers but ultimately it comes back to the nation they're in to create a law to forbid these practices.
