The wife of singer Paul Weller has called for a change in the law to protect children from media intrusion.
Hannah Weller said she wanted other parents to join her and "take a stand for all our children".
Speaking outside London's High Court where earlier this year the family won £10,000 in privacy damages, she said: "We're calling for a change in the law to give children better protection from the prying eyes of the press. It should be a criminal offence to violate any child's right to grow up free from media intrusion."
Her husband, the 55-year-old former frontman of The Jam and The Style Council, sued Associated Newspapers for misuse of private information on behalf of daughter Dylan, who was 16 when the seven unpixellated pictures appeared on MailOnline in October 2012, and twin sons John-Paul and Bowie, who were 10 months old.
The pictures were published after a paparazzo followed Weller and his children on a shopping trip through the streets of Santa Monica, California, taking photos without their consent despite being asked to stop.
Hannah Weller said: "I am here today because we as parents decided to make a stand against this threatening, aggressive and abusive behaviour and when we did, the judge agreed with us that publishing photographs of children without parental consent is against the law. Thanks to our legal team, newspaper editors will think twice before publishing photographs of our children in the future.
"The law is now clear but sadly, it is not properly enforced. Many newspaper publishers continue to compromise the safety and privacy of children.
"As it stands, the decision about whether or not to thrust children into the media spotlight lies with the discretion of the editors of money-hungry newspapers and online gossip websites who are often more concerned with their own bottom line than the best interests of children.
"These people have shown repeatedly that they cannot be trusted to make the right choices and so it is time to take this decision from them and make it a criminal offence to expose children in this way. Children deserve special protection from the prying eyes of the press."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article