November 29, 200817 yr Have we taken the address out of the first post? I agree it's completely disrespectful. No paper should print the address of anyone, whether they're famous or not. I'm glad you two emailed Debs :)
November 29, 200817 yr you could send a card to jonny's new adress... that would alert them enough :rolleyes: no seriously... that ain't fair poor jonny!
November 29, 200817 yr jonny is my neighbour. thats my subway stop. Maybe you'll bump into him one morning picking up a macchiato in Starbucks! :P
November 29, 200817 yr I emailed her a link to the first article. Glad you two girls let Debs know what was going on...... :\ Just thinking. We post messages & comments on articles & blogs which slag Coldplay off. Maybe we should do the same for these articles telling them how disgusting we think it is. I think we should. Do we have a link to where this article came from???
November 29, 200817 yr Congrats! I'm happy for Jonny that he's bought a place that could be a home away from home... don't need it as a singleton, but when you have a family... i don't know what happened with Guy and his baby mama, but i feel badly for him that it didn't work out, and happy for Jonny for this next step in his life... I agree with everyone else on this forum... BOO too publishing the address and floor! And most buildings have only four corner units, so its really fu*ked that all that info was published. I would've been happy to know he bought a condo on Manhattan island so that next time I was there, I could get the butterflies in my belly at the thought that I might run into him or the other guys in the band... Oh well, Jonny could always buy a place elsewhere...
November 29, 200817 yr While I agree that it's an invasion of privacy to publish the address, I do feel it's worth noting that thanks to the NY Post, Obsever and other various gossip rags it's fairly common knowledge where a ton of "celebrities" live in NYC. Also, in most (if not all) U.S. jurisdictions, property deeds are a matter of public record. If someone really wants to know someone's address, all they have to do is go to the appropriate records office and search.:dozey: Anyway, I'm sure a high end building like that has security, odds are JB isn't even the only celebrity in the building, as that general area is home to quite a few famous people.
November 29, 200817 yr While I agree that it's an invasion of privacy to publish the address, I do feel it's worth noting that thanks to the NY Post, Obsever and other various gossip rags it's fairly common knowledge where a ton of "celebrities" live in NYC. Also, in most (if not all) U.S. jurisdictions, property deeds are a matter of public record. If someone really wants to know someone's address, all they have to do is go to the appropriate records office and search.:dozey: Anyway, I'm sure a high end building like that has security, odds are JB isn't even the only celebrity in the building, as that general area is home to quite a few famous people. Even if it is a common thing for celebrity addresses to be published in US newspapers (not the same in the UK - it's not common, as far as I know), it still doesn't make it right. The way I see it, it's just not necessary to report the actual address. Fine to report he's bought a place and even that it is in the East Village. But adding the address doesn't add any value to the news. It doesn't make it more newsworthy. So for me, that means it's over stepping the privacy mark. As for the info being a public report, that is very different from it being published in a newspaper. Most people wouldn't bother going through public records to find out where Jonny Buckland has his home, but the newspapers have made this information available worldwide on the internet. Totally unnecessarily. That is very different from a public record. You are constantly being advised not to release any personal details about yourself on the internet for your own security, yet it is okay to do it with someone else's information, just because they are a 'celebrity'?!? It's just not a decent or necessary thing to do. That kind of thing can have real consequences for Jonny and his family.
November 30, 200817 yr It's NOT ok. I was just pointing out that it's hardly unique, especially from my experience in NYC. (Though they have it on the west coast too as "maps to stars' homes" are a very popular tourist item there.) Sadly, to the best of my knowledge, there is nothing illegal about thia under U.S. law. Does the U.K. have more stringint privacy laws?
November 30, 200817 yr It's NOT ok. I was just pointing out that it's hardly unique, especially from my experience in NYC. (Though they have it on the west coast too as "maps to stars' homes" are a very popular tourist item there.) Sadly, to the best of my knowledge, there is nothing illegal about thia under U.S. law. Does the U.K. have more stringint privacy laws? well hate to say this but alot of things are published in the paper. If you buy a house, if you have a lein, If your house is in forclosure, if you are going to court. That is just the law not much you can do about it really.
November 30, 200817 yr Even if it is a common thing for celebrity addresses to be published in US newspapers (not the same in the UK - it's not common, as far as I know), it still doesn't make it right. The way I see it, it's just not necessary to report the actual address. Fine to report he's bought a place and even that it is in the East Village. But adding the address doesn't add any value to the news. It doesn't make it more newsworthy. So for me, that means it's over stepping the privacy mark. As for the info being a public report, that is very different from it being published in a newspaper. Most people wouldn't bother going through public records to find out where Jonny Buckland has his home, but the newspapers have made this information available worldwide on the internet. Totally unnecessarily. That is very different from a public record. You are constantly being advised not to release any personal details about yourself on the internet for your own security, yet it is okay to do it with someone else's information, just because they are a 'celebrity'?!? It's just not a decent or necessary thing to do. That kind of thing can have real consequences for Jonny and his family. It's NOT ok. I was just pointing out that it's hardly unique, especially from my experience in NYC. (Though they have it on the west coast too as "maps to stars' homes" are a very popular tourist item there.) Sadly, to the best of my knowledge, there is nothing illegal about thia under U.S. law. Does the U.K. have more stringint privacy laws? I'd be interested to know what the US law says about the usage of publically available information. Whilst researching my family tree, I have access to the birth, marriage & death indexes for everyone in the UK upto 2006. I can use it for my personal research only. It is publically available information, but there are restrictions on what you are legally allowed to do with that information. The Material and Service are protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights. The Indexes of Births, Marriages and Deaths ("the Indexes") and census images are protected by Crown copyright and database rights. At the very least to use that information, I'd be breaking copyright but I would also be on dodgy legal ground as well. The rest of the conditions (which I won't bore you with) run through using the info for your own or a clients family tree only, not selling the info, or publishing it online.
November 30, 200817 yr It's NOT ok. I was just pointing out that it's hardly unique, especially from my experience in NYC. (Though they have it on the west coast too as "maps to stars' homes" are a very popular tourist item there.) Sadly, to the best of my knowledge, there is nothing illegal about thia under U.S. law. Does the U.K. have more stringint privacy laws? I'm not sure about the legal side of things. I think it may just be that the UK newspapers and magazines accept that it's not the right thing to do and therefore generally don't do it. They often report the area that the celeb lives in e.g. Kate Moss lives in Primrose Hill, Chris & Gwyneth in Hampstead etc, but not an address. It's a bit like not publishing pap pictures of celebrity babies & small children, or fuzzing out their faces. It's not a legal requirement but lots (not all) of the UK newspapers and publications choose to do this as they feel publishing pap pics of kids is not the right thing to do (which is true). Well, at least the block Jonny is in is apparently secure. That's the most important thing :)
November 30, 200817 yr "I'd be interested to know what the US law says about the usage of publically available information." All public records here can be accessed and used by anyone in any way they deem fit. You have to make a special petition if you wnat records such as your home address or car tag to be sealed from the public (many celebrities have tried this tactic.), however weather or not such requests are granted depends largely on which state you live in. Even if such a request is granted, that only takes said records out of public listing, if somewone happened to find the info, they could still publish it. Sadly, there seems to be a huge amount of info on Jonny's building (and other celebrities that live there) available online. Appearantly, there are a few other celebrities in the building. (don't really feel right posting who, but there seem to be at least two "a- list" actors and a Victoria's Secret model have units in the same building.)
Create an account or sign in to comment