The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1721  
Old 09-05-2020, 06:31 AM
Fem's Avatar
Fem Fem is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: UK, Poland
Posts: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by yukari View Post
That's the question, isn't it? It would be even funnier if the paps turns out to be an American working for American paps agency.
Splash News & Pictures Agency is an american company, though they do also have UK offices. They're quite often the ones getting photos of the Sussexes. I think they were also the ones who took the photos of the Cotswolds home.

Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
So... is the lawyer saying that other pap pics of them in public were done with their "acquiescence or consent"?
That's why it's not a good idea to sue over photos unless they really cross a line, because it looks exactly like that.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1722  
Old 09-07-2020, 09:22 PM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,756
This just came over on Omid Scobie's Twitter: Harry is suing the Sunday Times for reporting the Sussexes bailed on the Invictus charity event because of the Netflix deal. Royal reporter Roya Nikkah wrote the story. With Invictus backing this up, stating the story is false I don't see how the Times wins here.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1723  
Old 09-07-2020, 09:28 PM
acdc1's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: somewhere in, United States
Posts: 2,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
This just came over on Omid Scobie's Twitter: Harry is suing the Sunday Times for reporting the Sussexes bailed on the Invictus charity event because of the Netflix deal. Royal reporter Roya Nikkah wrote the story. With Invictus backing this up, stating the story is false I don't see how the Times wins here.
Not saying the press was right in this instance (they’re not), but it seems like H&M are extremely trigger-happy with suing the press these days.
Reply With Quote
  #1724  
Old 09-07-2020, 10:00 PM
AC21091968's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
This just came over on Omid Scobie's Twitter: Harry is suing the Sunday Times for reporting the Sussexes bailed on the Invictus charity event because of the Netflix deal. Royal reporter Roya Nikkah wrote the story. With Invictus backing this up, stating the story is false I don't see how the Times wins here.
This is a terrible move by Harry, given the incidence (caused by Extinction Rebellion) that happened last weekend. A lot of politician and commentators believe the protest blockage of newspaper printing presses (Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph, The Sun, Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, The Times, Sunday Times, London Evening Standard, Financial Times) was an attack of free speech and freedom of press.

The Sunday Times' reporting is definitely false, but I don't think suing the press is helping his cause. Even the Invictus has confirm that the decision for charity event occur before the Netflix deal, so effectively the false story has been shut down. I don't see the point suing the Sunday Times. The Daily Mail has also reported the same, is he suing them as well?

Imagine every public figure filing a lawsuit for every false stories published by the media, there will be endless court cases.

Is Harry and Meghan seriously unaware of freedom of press?
Reply With Quote
  #1725  
Old 09-07-2020, 10:39 PM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,756
Freedom of the press does not mean printing a false story that could cause harm. Writing that the Sussexes dumped Invictus could have impacted the event to go forward at all or make it hard it for getting replacements. The Times needs to print a retraction and an apology and Harry would drop the suit. Otherwise Roya would have to name her source at trial to stick with the story.
Reply With Quote
  #1726  
Old 09-07-2020, 10:39 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,697
That story by Roya was false and I think Harry is expecting a swift retraction and apology by the Sunday Times rather than a full court case. The story was an additional thumping in addition to the DM going full pelt about Frogmore Cottage renovations on the same weekend. He (and the Invictus spokesperson) closed these stories down quickly.
Reply With Quote
  #1727  
Old 09-07-2020, 11:08 PM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,756
On the Times website there is scrawl at the top saying this story is subject to a legal action by the Duke of Sussex. Not Sure if that is an acknowledgement the Times stepped in it here. I'm not sure if Roya and the editor are having a come to Jesus meeting with the brass with the choices clean up this mess or clean out your desk.
Reply With Quote
  #1728  
Old 09-07-2020, 11:20 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
This just came over on Omid Scobie's Twitter: Harry is suing the Sunday Times for reporting the Sussexes bailed on the Invictus charity event because of the Netflix deal. Royal reporter Roya Nikkah wrote the story. With Invictus backing this up, stating the story is false I don't see how the Times wins here.

As a matter of fact, a false story is not sufficient to characterize libel. In the UK, a possible defense is to argue that the story was a "fair comment in a matter of public interest", meaning that the newspaper had reasons to believe (and genuninely believed) that the story was true when it published it and that it did its best to verify the accuracy of the story within the time constraints imposed by the urgency to publish a matter of public interest.



In the US, because of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the First Amendment, winning a libel case on the grounds of publication of false information is even more difficult as the plaintiff has to prove that the newspaper acted on malicious intent, i.e that it knew that the story was false and deliberately published it nonetheless to harm the plaintiff.



It may look that UK and US law are similar in that respect, but the burden of proof is reversed in the two countries. In the UK the defendant has to prove, as a defense, that it did not act maliciously while, in the US, it is the contrary, i.e. the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant acted maliciously. Either way, as I said in the beginning, the fact that the story was false in itself is not enough.
Reply With Quote
  #1729  
Old 09-07-2020, 11:37 PM
Eskimo's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
As a matter of fact, a false story is not sufficient to characterize libel. In the UK, a possible defense is to argue that the story was a "fair comment in a matter of public interest", meaning that the newspaper had reasons to believe (and genuninely believed) that the story was true when it published it and that it did its best to verify the accuracy of the story within the time constraints imposed by the urgency to publish a matter of public interest.



In the US, because of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the First Amendment, winning a libel case on the grounds of publication of false information is even more difficult as the plaintiff has to prove that the newspaper acted on malicious intent, i.e that it knew that the story was false and deliberately published it nonetheless to harm the plaintiff.



It may look that UK and US law are similar in that respect, but the burden of proof is reversed in the two countries. In the UK the defendant has to prove, as a defense, that it did not act maliciously while, in the US, it is the contrary, i.e. the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant acted maliciously. Either way, as I said in the beginning, the fact that the story was false in itself is not enough.
So unless The Times settles this, it will be another drawn out and costly lawsuit?


Edited to add: This is a complaint not a lawsuit
Reply With Quote
  #1730  
Old 09-07-2020, 11:39 PM
JessRulz's Avatar
Administrator
Blog Editor
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
On the Times website there is scrawl at the top saying this story is subject to a legal action by the Duke of Sussex. Not Sure if that is an acknowledgement the Times stepped in it here. I'm not sure if Roya and the editor are having a come to Jesus meeting with the brass with the choices clean up this mess or clean out your desk.
The scrawl is at the top of the original article, not the entire The Times website. Standard procedure when an article has a IPSO complaint made about it. No need to exaggerate.

The Times is not going to have a "come to Jesus meeting" with Roya over this particular article - at most, the article will be retracted and a two-line apology published. Perhaps a donation to the Invictus Games if The Times wants to win some favour.

Let's be realistic here.
__________________
**TRF Rules and FAQ**
Reply With Quote
  #1731  
Old 09-08-2020, 03:00 AM
AC21091968's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
So unless The Times settles this, it will be another drawn out and costly lawsuit?


Edited to add: This is a complaint not a lawsuit
If it's a complaint to the Sunday Times, then I'm glad. I do not want this to go to the courts. Harry and Meghan has filed too many lawsuits to date. Frankly, I think the British public are sick of it (from reading the social media posts under BBC, sky or itv news).
Reply With Quote
  #1732  
Old 09-08-2020, 03:12 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,697
And no doubt Harry and Meghan are sick of false stories appearing in the British Press casting them in a negative light over something they haven't done.

Unfortunately, before Harry filed that complaint the original story reappeared, copied within minutes in online British tabloids, complete with embroideries about shattered Invictus vets angry at Harry, and on dozens of overseas inline sites as well.
Reply With Quote
  #1733  
Old 09-08-2020, 03:32 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,636
In a way, I'm glad that Harry was quick to file a complaint against the Sunday Times in regards to the false Invictus stories. This shows me that if there's one thing you *don't* do its attack someone's child and to me, the Invictus Games are just as much Harry's child as Archie is. He has always been deeply involved and passionate about this organization and that hasn't changed.

It also lays to rest, for me, the speculations that with the "new life", Harry and the Invictus Games would part ways or become obsolete.

Good going Harry!!
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #1734  
Old 09-08-2020, 07:46 AM
texankitcat's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,015
So now they are Legally going after US news organizations as well. Welcome to America Harry. It’s a good thing they are becoming financially independent so they can pay their own legal fees. Their Lawyers will have bigger mansions than they do in no time.
Reply With Quote
  #1735  
Old 09-08-2020, 08:19 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,345
Well the Times has removed the article.
Reply With Quote
  #1736  
Old 09-08-2020, 09:21 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,345
I have no issue with him filing a complaint over a blatant lie. They were implying he was dismissing something extremely important to him. It spread around as fact. They have since removed it and now it’s been explained it wasn’t even officially scheduled. It was just in conversation. Anyways it was corrected though not that it matters overall. Damage was done.
Reply With Quote
  #1737  
Old 09-08-2020, 09:26 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Hamilton, United Kingdom
Posts: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by texankitcat View Post
So now they are Legally going after US news organizations as well. Welcome to America Harry. It’s a good thing they are becoming financially independent so they can pay their own legal fees. Their Lawyers will have bigger mansions than they do in no time.

Well that agency was taking photos in BC where it is illegal to take pap pics .And guess what they now live in California and their are rules their about taking pap pics as well
Reply With Quote
  #1738  
Old 09-08-2020, 09:41 AM
HighGoalHighDreams's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Unspecified, United States
Posts: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
Freedom of the press does not mean printing a false story that could cause harm. Writing that the Sussexes dumped Invictus could have impacted the event to go forward at all or make it hard it for getting replacements. The Times needs to print a retraction and an apology and Harry would drop the suit. Otherwise Roya would have to name her source at trial to stick with the story.
There are very, very few protections for public figures in the United States when it comes to false stories, including damaging stories, printed in the press. Freedom of the press does in fact extend, in most cases, to printing false stories that cause harm, at least when it comes to public figures. Nor do reporters have to "name their sources" at trial- the burden is on the moving party.
Reply With Quote
  #1739  
Old 09-08-2020, 09:48 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humbugged View Post
Well that agency was taking photos in BC where it is illegal to take pap pics .And guess what they now live in California and their are rules their about taking pap pics as well
There are going to be photos of them all the time, if they continue with a public career..
Reply With Quote
  #1740  
Old 09-08-2020, 02:14 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
Well the Times has removed the article.
After getting a ton of free publicity when Harry made the complaint, which was probably their goal to start with.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abu dhabi american history anastasia once upon a time ancestry armstrong-jones baby names biography british royal family brownbitcoinqueen carolin cht cpr duchess of sussex duke of sussex earl of snowdon family tree games general news thread george vi gradenigo haakon vii hereditary grand duchess stéphanie history hochberg hypothetical monarchs imperial household interesting introduction jewellery jewelry jumma kids movie list of rulers luxembourg mailing maxima monarchy mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal family pless prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess dita princess elizabeth princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange queen elizabeth ii queen louise queen maud resusci anne royal balls royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royalty of taiwan royal wedding russian court dress spain stuart thai royal family videos von hofmannsthal wedding gown


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:15 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×