Teejay I got to agree with you mate.
At the end of the day a celebrity/ known figure sells his image to the corporate advertisers based on that public image. If he/she decides to undermine that public image then they forfeit the right to expect continued advertising of that image. Effectively they are in breach of that contract, they may of made millions for a company but they also earned millions on the back of it.
As for privacy I dont agree that he deserves it while using his image/lifestyle as a marketing tool and being paid handsomely for the priviledge. However now he has stepped back from that he should be allowed an opportunity of privacy not so much for him but his family.
A lot of people do a 'job' that makes them famous to varying degrees, the 'job' itself doesnt give anyone the right to invade their privacy. But if those people chose to sell their image on the basis of the perception of them by the public then they can expect ridicule when they are found to be in breach of that image they or others (with consent) have created.
Thats my pennies worth.....