Judge: Mosley has no expectation of privacy.

Perhaps if there was no pics or film footage of the orgy, then Max would have stood a better chance to sue the news paper!
Because then if theres no pics/film clip were is the evidence he was involved!
But i have seen the pics in the paper but not seen the clips (yet).
Lets all wait and see what happens!

It does have a huge nazi connotation anyway

ill tell u what i saw the vid and it s just ridiculous to me - even funny

No-one in the public eye should have much expectation of privacy. It's the price of being famous. You may say that MM doesn't want to be famous, but he sure doesn't act that way. With his always seeking the limelight, he gives the impression that he really enjoys people hanging onto his every word.

Who's going to start a whip round for his leaving present?

They were even joking about it on the Jay Leno show in the US the other night - so that's the main reason that Mosley should resign because he, and the FIA, are now a laughing stock! Although personally I believe he's done nothing wrong - the nazi connotations were just a laugh, not to be taken serioulsy.

Barrie, whether anybody is entitled to laugh about nazi stuff is a tricky issue. At least I believe no public person should do so, especially someone whose parents were close friends to Adolf Hitler.

For me the key issue is whether or not there were nazi-inspired stuff in this otherwise ridiculous ass-spanking orgy.

However, I am very surprised by the statement of this judge: allowing News of theWorld to publish the video again on the basis that many ppl have seen it already is just crazy! Can any English reader tell us whether it's common practice in the UK?

If something hasn't been published then it's common enough to obtain an injunction preventing publication, but like the judge said - what's the point of an injunction against something already published? That's the reality of the internet, once it's out it's out.

They were spanking bottoms, but I guarantee Max didn't expect to get
1,424,959 hits.Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha .......

Hey chu chu, has the vid gone around on facebook yet?

When you go into public life regardless of the type of work that you are involved in whether you a large multi national business, or a sportsman etc. You performances in your profession and what you get upto away from it will be placed under serious scrutny due to the 24 hour media culture that exists through the improvements in technology that we (the current generation) are priviledged to have. And it is important that you have conduct yourselves to the highest possible standard, and if you don't you will get crucified in the media. Which is what happened to Max Mosley. But you can also argue with his family background who have been actively involved in far right racist politics.

Continued.

Otherwise you will be vilified for it, and that is what is happening to Mosley for his Nazi style orgy.

"... and it also covers the tea break."

LOL, priceless!!! Best quote of this whole affair...

James Price QC is wrong to say that the footage has no public interest. The site where it is shown has been hit by anything around 1,500,000 times.
Sorry James, but you seem to be as out of touch with reality as your client.

Too bad they didn't have the access to small video cameras when JFK was President of the United States. We would've had hours of american style porn.

Male, 67, No SOH, into cars, money, uniforms and power. Seeks 5xF 20-25 for tea, light spanking and friendship - maybe more. Must have own video camera. Chelsea area. Reply BOX2008 - send photo or post footage on internet.

Reno

Please read the article again - the judge says there is "no legitimate public interest in its further publication".

The word legitimate is key, and your comment misses the point completely.

Simon, I hope that you are not excusing Max!!!!!
"no legitimate public interest" or "no public interest" means absolutely the same thing. That is the way QC's express themselves, the meaning is the same.

Of course there is public interest, of course there is legitimate public interest by the national associations and their presidents.
We as the public have an interest, and the National Associations have to take a vote on it, so they have a full legitimate interest.

Reno

Public interest = people want to see it.

Legitimate public interest = people have the right to see it, regardless of the individual's personal wishes.

There is a specific and important difference between these two terms.

You made the point that there was public interest because many people had downloaded the film, which is true but irrelevant as the judge had made the second point.

Simon, my friend, I beg to differ on the meaning of the word or term legitimate.

Legitimate interest may mean lawful, legal or legit interest.
BUT it can also mean:
Genuine; rightful; justifiable; reasonable; valid; wll-founded interest; etc.

Don't you think that we as F1 followers and possible members of our national associations, have a genuine, rightful, justifiable, reasonable, valid and a well-founded interest in the publication of this subject?

Don't you think that the Council Members of all 222 National Associations and Clubs that are members of the FIA have a legitimate, lawful, legal, legit interest in the subject on which they shall be asked to vote in June?