Rather than following Mme Pieau around with a telephoto lens waiting to get a pic of her bare arse maybe someone should try to get sight of her tax returns and publicise them instead.

She should know these things, maybe she's slow. Hint: don't pick the nose, scratch yourself, burp in public or drop the kit. If that's too hard for her, maybe she should think about another job...

What I don't understand is why so many respondents are conflating the idea of the publication or otherwise of the pictures and their anti-royalism. I'm borderline apathetic on the subject of whether wer should have a royal family but this has nothing to do with whether one of them should be photographed topless by someone with a telephoto lense and have her breasts flashed all over the world against her will.

Note it's the "against her will" bit that is the real problem. People on beaches and elsewhere who may or may not attract the odd glance are in full knowledge of the fact that they're out in public, so they have some sort of control over the situation. This is all about someone else being in charge of Kate's body and using it for their own ends, and is a separate issue from whether or not she's a royalist parasite as some in here say (and have every right to believe). I'd have the same view if these were unwitting pictures of someone who stacks shelves somewhere; the one thing doesn't relate to the other, except in that nobody would bother with the pics of a non-celeb,

If this the case then I demand full nudity images of the following:
* Tony blair
* Gordon brown
* Nick cleg
* David cameron
* david Miliband
* Jack Straw x 2
* Vice Cable
* william Hague
* ed Miliband
* MANDELSON

I have knowledge of the existence of these photographs, and will YOU, (Helen Lewis) provide these to your readers in a 300dpi downloadable format viewable on all machines, clearly this comes within the Job Description to provide the images to your readers, and I speak for many when I say this is something I would very much like to see.

I think we should be proud to see that the Duchess has knocked such pseudo-celebs as Kim Kardashian, Lindsay Lohan and Cheryl Cole off the front pages.

I'm sure the editor of Closer has her picture beside her monthly editorial. If it's no big thing and Closer celebrates breasts, then she should have no problems changing that picture of hers to one where she's topless - after all, it's something to celebrate! right? hmmm why do I think there's more chance of hell freezing over than that happening?

Good piece. It was nauseating to hear the editor cooing about a couple in love. Most couples in love would grab a robe sharpish if they thought someone was peeping tomming at them.

Yet another diversion; something to go on about that doesn't matter.

This type of thing is the scourge of women everywhere not just celebrities and royals.

Men routinely use camera phones to secretly and not so secretly take pictures of random women in the street and on public transport and on beaches. There is a whole porn genre for such photos taken without women's permission, up skirts, up bikinis, etc. I don't know if they still do it, but high street softporn mags used to pay men for submissions.

This is about more than privacy, though it definitely is about that, but it's also about a form of sexual abuse, men thinking they have a right over women's bodies with or without their consent. And it's no surprise that the lame old excuses of "what does she expect?", "it's her own fault" are being wheeled out to defend it.

Helen, i understand the point you`re making, "Practice what you preach", but after Brad and Angelina, these two over privileged parasites, are the so called most sort after couple on the planet!!, so when the royalists future Queen takes her kit off in the open, surely, they both know the score regarding putting themselves in such a stupid situation!, all of their own making!.
The sanctimonious tosh coming from all the Hysterical Sycophants, is laughable!, Mrs Windsor should ask her publicity obsessed sister about using the media when it suits them!!, i can`t understand all these Royal bottom lickers wetting themselves over a pair of spoilt parasites!!.
Perhaps i`m being naive, but surely, the bodyguards and their servants were there?, so she must be very confident about getting her kit off in front of people?, because she must`ve been exposing herself to them?, just a thought!.

WHat a sad state of affairs when even the NS are penning articles to defend Kate. I for one am sick and tired of hearing about this pompous feudal Germanic familiy. WHat has happened to the Left in the UK. Very sad indeed. What happened to the cutting edge journalism for which the NS was renowned. Gone down the toilet!!!

Angry about 'humiliating a woman to flog a few magazines', because, er, the NS has never done that. *cough* Naomi Wolf *cough*

If we take this away from any morality aspect, does the editor of french closer feel this is going to help the brand in any way? Or indeed the editor of the italian mag, soon to publish photos? Perhaps the market in france and Italy is huge for such photos and the cover price of the mag will make them a fortune. Otherwise, how can a womens mag not see how ridiculously bad for advertising this will be? Will any brand aimed at mums, fashionistas etc want to be tainted with any advertising related to the companies that run these mags? What an own goal. I admit to looking at websites and mags at times for fashion etc. I may look at the adverts inside or on associated websites. But now these porn mags are putting me off my favourite coffee brand, face creams and perfumes! It may work for lads that read the sun, but think these mag editors have forgotten their readership. Also, people will find the pics on the internet and save money by not buying the mag. Love to be a fly on the wall at the next advertising meeting at the various companies associated with these mags when they find all reputable brands have pulled out.