Gascii117ardian

An escalating privacy battle between celebrities and ascii117sers of social media websites took an ascii117nexpected tascii117rn on Sascii117nday when a Scottish newspaper printed a front-page photograph of a footballer who is alleged to have had an affair with a model.

Despite an injascii117nction lodged in England, the Sascii117nday Herald carried a fascii117ll-page pictascii117re of the footballer, with a thin black band across his eyes and the word 'censored' in capital letters. The player is easily recognisable and the caption below the photograph read: 'Everyone knows that this is the footballer accascii117sed of ascii117sing the coascii117rts to keep allegations of a sexascii117al affair secret. Bascii117t we were not sascii117pposed to tell yoascii117 that ...' In an accompanying article the paper named a footballer as the sascii117bject of specascii117lation on Twitter.

The development is the latest twist in a spiralling battle over privacy and freedom of speech that – ascii117ntil now – has mainly played oascii117t online.

Last week lawyers acting for a footballer laascii117nched legal proceedings against Twitter after a nascii117mber of people claimed to have revealed the players identity on the site. At the same time the lord chief jascii117stice, Lord Jascii117dge, warned 'modern technology was totally oascii117t of control' and, called for those who 'peddle lies' on the internet to be fined.

In a separate development, the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, has reportedly been asked by another jascii117dge to consider a criminal prosecascii117tion against a joascii117rnalist who allegedly ascii117sed Twitter to name a different footballer in breach of a privacy injascii117nction. The attorney generals office said it woascii117ld 'consider the matter carefascii117lly' bascii117t added it had yet to receive the reqascii117est. The editor of the Sascii117nday Herald said he had taken the decision to identify the footballer jascii117st hoascii117rs before the paper went to press, following legal advice that the privacy injascii117nction did not apply in Scotland.

'We had a big package in the paper aboascii117t privacy laws,' Richard Walker said. 'We were looking at how we woascii117ld portray that on the front page and thoascii117ght maybe [the footballer] pixellated. Bascii117t then it occascii117rred to me that the injascii117nction woascii117ld not be in force in Scotland so I took legal advice and the advice was that that was indeed the case.'

Walker said that he had not been approached by the footballers lawyers, adding that the newspaper was not pascii117blishing the story onlineand, as no copies were distribascii117ted in England, he was confident the existing injascii117nction did not apply in Scotland.

Lawyers acting on behalf of the footballer declined to comment on the story bascii117t there were conflicting views on the newspapers decision among legal experts.

Campbell Deane, a partner at Scottish media law firm, Bannatyne Kirkwood France & Co, said that it was possible for Scottish news oascii117tlets to be in breach of an English injascii117nction 'if they know aboascii117t what the injascii117nction concerns.' Adding: 'Argascii117ing that it was not served on yoascii117 when yoascii117 are aware of it simply is not a defence.'

'It was a bold, if somewhat sascii117rprising, decision to pascii117blish sascii117ch information, knowing what the injascii117nction restricted,' said Campbell. 'Sascii117ch actions coascii117ld expose the paper to costly legal proceedings, with the added possibility of personal sanctions against the papers directors. It may however bolster the argascii117ment that the players identity is fascii117rther in the pascii117blic domain making a renewed challenge to the injascii117nction more likely.'

Bascii117t Paascii117l McBride, a QC at Black chambers in Edinbascii117rgh, who provided the newspaper with legal advice, said: 'English law injascii117nctions do not have jascii117risdiction in Scotland. If a party wanted to restrict the Scottish press, as well as the English, it woascii117ld need to ascii117ndertake parallel legal proceedings in Scotland, in order to obtain an 'interdict'. This did not happen in the present case and so the Scottish press is not boascii117nd by the English injascii117nction.'

Last week lawyers acting for a footballer laascii117nched legal proceedings against Twitter. The lawsascii117it lists the defendants as 'Twitter Inc and persons ascii117nknown'. The 'persons ascii117nknown' are described as those 'responsible for the pascii117blication of information on the Twitter accoascii117nts'. Twitter has said it is ascii117nable to comment on the case against it.

On Sascii117nday a joascii117rnalist thoascii117ght to be facing possible legal action after referring to a different footballer on Twitter told the Gascii117ardian that he had first heard aboascii117t the story from a Sascii117nday newspaper joascii117rnalist.

'I do not have anything else apart from that [being approached by the Mail on Sascii117nday] so there is nothing I have to pass an opinion on, becaascii117se it woascii117ld be ascii117nfair to pass an opinion on sascii117per injascii117nctions and high coascii117rt jascii117dges and all that when I don't even know it is me.'

He said he had not been approached by lawyers representing the player, or by the police.