AP Photo/ Louis LanzanoJ.K. Rowling didn't need the Dark Arts to make the paparazzi go poof.
Instead, the Harry Potter author took to the courts to win a ban against future publication of photos taken of her son David without his consent.
A British court of appeals has upheld the privacy case, brought last year by Rowling (under her married name of Joanne Murray) and husband Neil Murray over a photo of them pushing their then-18-month-old in a stroller.
"We understand and accept that with the success of Harry Potter there will be a measure of legitimate media and public interest in Jo's professional activities and appearances," the couple said in a statement after the ruling. "However, we have striven to give our children a normal family life outside the media spotlight.
"We are immensely grateful to the court for giving our children protection from covert, unauthorized photography; this ruling will make an immediate and material difference to their lives."
The High Court initially rejected the claim against paparazzi agency Big Pictures, which snapped the candid pic, and the tabloid Sunday Express, which published the photo.
Although the grievance was filed against both the paper and the agency last year, the judgment came against only Big Picture. Sunday Express, which published the photo in November 2004, settled Rowling's claim out of court.