Transcript for Celebrities Win One in Their War Against Intruding Photographers
Next, here, tonight, a lot of impassioned celebrities can declare a kind of first-round victory in their war against intruding photographers. "People" magazine has announced that from now on, pictures that target children of the stars is offlimits. And ABC's Ryan smith tells us the big implications of this, offer some movie stars very big relief. Reporter: It's said to be the new price of fame. Paparazzi, chasing the children of stars. Their young lives, caught in the crosshairs of their parents' celebrity. And the stars have been complaining in public. I don't want a gang of shouting, arguing, law-breaking photographers, to continue traumatizing my kids. We're moms here, who are just trying to protect our children. Reporter: And now, "People" magazine is taking a stand. In a letter on people.com, the new editorial corrector, jess Cagle, announcing he told staff, quote, "People" would not publish of photos of celebs' kids taken against their parents' wishes, in print or online. Some see this as a first step of prestricting paparazzi and protecting kids. Celebrities understand they're the target of paparazzi. But what they can't abide is their children having a price on their head. Reporter: Unsanctioned photos of celebrities rake in big money. The Halle berry paparazzi bill, increasing jail time for paparazzi vikted of stalking kids. They're asking supporters to stop buying magazines that do this to kids. Like it or not, paparazzi are here to stay. But if they can start to get the message it's not okay to shoot the kids of celebrities, that's a step in the right direction. Reporter: As for "People" magazine, it will still run photos approved by parents. In the letter leaves the door open for, quote, rare exceptions, based on the newsworthiness of photos. But tonight, the beginning of a new chapter of how public a celebrity's life should really be. Ryan smith, ABC news, New York.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.