I actually received some photos from a friend who received them from a friend and so on. As soon as I saw them I could tell they were someone’s personal pictures. Jenn posing with one lady and David, Courtney, Coco and another lady posing together and then one of just the second lady with Coco. They were taken inside the church. I did not forward the pics as I felt it was a private moment. I do have to say, Courtney looked radient and Coco is just adorable.

Deb, it sound like they’re mad about the christening pictures.

So, are they mad that ANY pictures are out there of Coco, or just the ones from the christening? I understand the christening being a private event for family and friends. But, their comment made it sound like they would sue anyone who published any picture of their child. Celebrity and private are two words that just don’t go together.

Just because your a celebrity does not mean your whole life should be the public’s viewing! There does need to be a limit when it comes to celebs and photographers! I mean, look at what happened with Princess Diana!

I think they do have the right to be mad. It was their daughter’s PRIVATE christening. A family event that they wanted to keep secrete for little coco. It’s sad that memory of the christening will be “spoiled” because of the photo leak!

Here is where the thread started…
From: epper001@bellsouth.net
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 8:38 AM
Subject: [Fwd: Fw: Picture from Microsoft Picture It!]
Check out these pictures! The lady that you don’t know is Rich’s aunt and
the girl w/ Jennifer (my best friend) is Rich’s cousin. Isn’t the baby
so cute? Have a great day!
Amy

Ohhh,please! Like no one has seen pictures of their baby before. I know the Arquettes want privacy when it come to their family – and I respect that. On the positive side, this is a great chance for non-celebrities to see that even though these people are famous, they still do normal things just like you and me.

Also if the Arquettes keep getting upset about things like this then they are going to be getting upset about alotof things. Because lack of privacy is apart of fame. I’M NOT SAYING THAT IT IS RIGHT. But that’s just how it is.

AH perfect example of why you want to limit your photos in group

I had the same thought that Brandi did–someone at the film processing center could have stolen the photos. Or if the photos are digital, if the photographer uploaded them to one of the photo printing services, someone there could have stolen them. The thief may not have even meant to make money from stealing the photos, it could have been just an email they sent to their friends to say “Look whose pictures I developed today!” and then it escalated from there as emails are wont to do. Of course, I have no idea what happened, just throwing out some scenarios.

How awful. I don’t care who you are, you have a right to keep you child safe. There are so many sickos out there, this is a danger to their daughter. It’s also disrespectful to them to be selling a family photo to the press. We all enjoy looking a photos of celebs, but I think there is a certain limit that people should be able to go to, and not beyond. I hope they win their suit and maybe it will make others reconsider when “selling them out”.

Are they definitely digital photos? If they were 35mm photos, whoever processed the film could’ve easily seen it as a money-making opportunity.