Hmm, so instead of being about non-consensual pictures of panties of random girls, it's about non-consensual pictures of random celebrities, and is thus ok? I haven't downvoted but the term is far from innocent.
If you are famous and attending a public event, you are well aware they will take photos. If you don't want your panties published, you should take appropriate measures to avoid flashing them. It is possible to do that. If they invade your home and take photos of you in your back yard or something, sure, sue the hell out of them. But a famous person at a public event is very often seeking publicity and looking to be photographed, not trying to avoid it. So I fail to see your point.
This is still victim blaming. Just because you're a celebrity it doesn't give people some sort of license to invade your privacy. You could argue that anyone who wears a skirt is asking for it, because their panties are visible at a certain angle (but nevertheless public space). But we don't want everyone covering up just to prevent creeps getting pictures.
Wikipedia often links to specific laws for stuff like this, you should read them if you're actually curious.
In the US, it's required that you have a reasonable expectation that your private areas cannot be seen. Which no reasonable person could have when naked in public.
If you wear a skirt in a public space, you expect people to have a level of decency and respect. In case you hadn't noticed, creeps are in the minority.
