Harry & Meghan: Legal Actions against the Media

[Charlie1224]

I’m not sure why Kate’s messages would matter if she chooses not to sue, which she obviously has chosen so far. There have been a good number of cases settled from phone hacking. They are separate from each other.

 

[Rudolph]

Mike: "I'm going to sue Harry and Meghan. I want the money back for every single thing that these pair have taken off of us as taxpayers. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle - you two are an absolutely disgrace."

Listen: Talk Radio

A bit of flavour from the airwaves. Thank god free speech is part of democratic debate.

 

[ACO]

Mike: "I'm going to sue Harry and Meghan. I want the money back for every single thing that these pair have taken off of us as taxpayers. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle - you two are an absolutely disgrace."

Listen: Talk Radio

A bit of flavour from the airwaves. Thank god free speech is part of democratic debate.

Good luck with that there Mike.

 

[Osipi]

Good luck with that there Mike.

Let's hope that the money that Mike makes that pays his taxes is enough that he never needs the benefits of any of the charities and organizations and programs that Harry and Meghan are championing.

Free speech is a privilege but not being able to see what the big picture is beyond the cost in green dollars is ignorance.

 

[Zaira]

Some Commentary from The Spectator. It’ll be interesting going forward how this all plays out in the ‘court’ of public opinion.




Entire article: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/prince-harrys-misguided-attack-on-the-press/

The Spectator doesn't like it? Quelle surprise. Meghan and Harry just breath and it gets them up in arms. The ring-wing media are part of the issue at hand.

And I see this is another OTT piece from Ms Williams. Well lets just say her views are best left for the bin.

 

[Osipi]

We all knew, just as God made little green apples, that there would be an onslaught of published opinions both negative and positive resulting from the announcement of lawsuits. Everyone and their grandmother's pet budgie is going to be having an opinion, taking advantage of the situation to call attention to themselves and proselytizing to sway other's opinions to their "side" and in general, cause chaos and mayhem.

I'm actually more interested in the legal actions themselves, the charges and how it may all go down in a court of law rather than being bombarded with what is "out there". In posting links to various "reactions" available, what it means for me is that these links are being posted as "taking sides" or for the shock and awe value. I don't read them nor am I going to. If there's a link posted that is reporting on the actual charges and the ins and outs of the legal action being taken, please advise me when posted? I'd appreciate it. ?

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Mike: "I'm going to sue Harry and Meghan. I want the money back for every single thing that these pair have taken off of us as taxpayers. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle - you two are an absolutely disgrace."

Listen: Talk Radio

A bit of flavour from the airwaves. Thank god free speech is part of democratic debate.

Free Speech is not the issue here. Infringements of copyright, of correspondence and of privacy are the issues here. Earlier the Princess of Hannover and the then Prince of Orange have started similar lawsuits, always referring to Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence."

In my idea the unauthorised publishing of private letters and of eavesdropped voice-mails are practices which deserve an opinion and eventual action from a Court of Justice. That is what the Sussexes did. Nothing to do with 'Free Speech' .

 

[wyevale]

As the Spectator article rightly points out the letter in question was already in the 'public domain', several of the Duchess' friends seeing fit to comment on it..

Are they too to be sued for copyright infringement ?

 

[BlackHat]

Ah yes, Free Speech. That beloved and much protected virtue.... until someone in the limelight speaks about climate change and feminism.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

As the Spectator article rightly points out the letter in question was already in the 'public domain', several of the Duchess' friends seeing fit to comment on it..

Are they too to be sued for copyright infringement ?

Commenting on a letter in the public domain is not the same as being the responsible for bringing said letter into the public domain.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Im not looking forward to hearing from The Markles every week from months on end. Now this is going to give them more ammunition to run to the press and talk nonsense. They had been mostly quiet for months now...and this is just going to make them more appealing to the press who want any kind of news story.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

In my opinion, the Sussexes would have been much better off to bring the lawsuit without publishing Harry's highly emotional letter. The merits of the lawsuit stand on their own, and the details about the letter Meghan wrote, Meghan's father, and their relationship are already likely to result in much more attention, discussion, press coverage, and muck raking than anyone would want to have to deal with. Harry's letter just adds more grist to the mill, and results in lots of unnecessary speculation, as we have seen on this thread.

The capper is that it is likely to fuel even more critical and speculative coverage in the press, and the timing altered the trajectory of the overall positive coverage of the SA tour in a way that pretty effectively killed the momentum the last day and a half of the tour. The letter and its publication is making me question Harry's judgment a bit.

edited for clarity

Very good points, the filing of a lawsuit was enough. No need to get over emotional with the situation; I understand he's angry but be angry in private and professional cool and calm in public.

 

[Madame Verseau]

Im not looking forward to hearing from The Markles every week from months on end. Now this is going to give them more ammunition to run to the press and talk nonsense. They had been mostly quiet for months now...and this is just going to make them more appealing to the press who want any kind of news story.

I don't think the Markles are going to be interviewed soon especially Dad by DM. If Dad is called an interview by DM could be seen as witness tampering I think since it is the respondent in Meghan's case. The press is circling the wagons and a Markle interview could be use as ammunition for the lawyers. You saw what happened when Dad released the letter and did the interview. Instead of exonerating him the letter reveal proves Dad lied about no contact from Meghan. Interviews about the case could be used as evidence and could open the paper up to future litigation since the Markles' contribution to dragging Meghan's character is well documented for three years.

 

[Osipi]

Interviews about the case could be used as evidence and could open the paper up to future litigation since the Markles' contribution to dragging Meghan's character is well documented for three years.

Um... nothing about any of these lawsuits is in regards to dragging Meghan's character through the mud There is no law against having a negative opinion about someone.

The Markles will not be called on for this court case about the letter Meghan wrote. Whether they talk to the press or not is their own choice. The central point of the copyright lawsuit is someone publishing a private letter into the public domain without permission from its author.

If I, as an example, went rummaging through the trash cans at KP and found a copy of that letter in Meghan's handwriting and then came here and posted every word of it verbatim or abridged, it could be *me* going to court in this matter. That's why there are copyright rules strictly enforced here by our moderators. It has nothing to do with character assassination at all. ?

 

[Jacknch]

Indeed, let's keep the Markle's out of this thread since they have little to do with the topic of the thread or the Court case as far as we know. Thank you.

 

[alvinking]

interesting deposition about phone hacking back in the days.
Harry's target is clear

 

[tommy100]

I 100% agree with Ista, they should have just gone ahead with the lawsuit without the, somewhat overly emotional, letter from Harry. I understand it must be hard to see your wife criticised in public but let the law take its course without the need for an emotional outburst.

I find it interesting that they are taking legal action over specific things - e.g copyright and phone tapping which are somewhat legally clear cut but Harry's letter was all about how mean and unfair the media were.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

I've been following this with interest. I completely agree that Harry should have a cause of action against anyone who hacks into phone messages. Those are absolutely private and hacking is illegal.

On the other hand - although I am very sympathetic to Meghan with respect to the publication of the letter (which I haven't read) - I don't think she should be able to prevail in this case. Obviously, I don't know British law, but it seems to me that the letter belongs to Mr. Markle, and he shared it with the press. Yes, they are her words but, if Meghan wins, it would make it difficult to share the contents of letters they received during the statutory copyright protection. Taken to the extreme, I wouldn't be able to share a letter from a Minister without his or her permission. That doesn't seem right to my American sensibilities - again, I don't know British law.

The fact that I don't think Meghan should be able to prevail in court does not alter my view that the media should not have published the letter--and her father should not have shown it to them. There should be journalistic standards and integrity. The public really doesn't have a 'right' to know about Meghan's relationship with her family. Some people are interested, but no public interest is served by these types of disclosures.

 

[alvinking]

I 100% agree with Ista, they should have just gone ahead with the lawsuit without the, somewhat overly emotional, letter from Harry. I understand it must be hard to see your wife criticised in public but let the law take its course without the need for an emotional outburst.

I find it interesting that they are taking legal action over specific things - e.g copyright and phone tapping which are somewhat legally clear cut but Harry's letter was all about how mean and unfair the media were.

I get the feeling you don't see the endgame eventhough it is obvious

The statement is a PR move, to highlight he bullying of his wife, not only domestically but also internationally.
From now on, everybody, even the foreign press will keep an eye on the tabloids looking for the said bullying
The there is the public opinion he wants on his side, since a large part of the population despise that kind of press, and their suits are like proxies
finally in the political realm through public outrage he want to reactivate a Leveson inquiry 2.0, to put an end the press practices once and for all, hence the reactivation of the phone hacking thing. It is simple, understandable by everybody, outrageous and unacceptable in addition to getting after Piers Morgan specifically

 

[Dman]

Very good points, the filing of a lawsuit was enough. No need to get over emotional with the situation; I understand he's angry but be angry in private and professional cool and calm in public.

Oh, they’re cool and calm when they’re in public. They’re just fighting for some justice behind the scenes. Folks don’t have to worry about their public appearances. They’re professional and have duties to attend to.

___________________________________________________

This is a good article from August on what the powerful outside forces are doing to Meghan-

“The Agonizing Press Behind Meghan Markle” -
https://medium.com/@pngwrites/the-agonizing-press-behind-meghan-markle-914a4c2e50e4

 

[LadyGlendower]

The letter itself was not published until after five anonymous friends statements were published in the People article and the existence of the letter referred to. That didn't change the fact that neither Mr Markle nor MoS sought copyright permission from Meghan but---the reference to it in the People article does make it newsworthy.

People's sources were anonymous. Were they real? Who are they? If they are real did Meghan give any of them permission to refer to the letter? If I were on defense for the MoS I would be pursuing those questions in court.

And that is why this is so interesting from a legal perspective.

 

[Somebody]

Oh, they’re cool and calm when they’re in public. They’re just fighting for some justice behind the scenes. Folks don’t have to worry about their public appearances. They’re professional and have duties to attend to.

Harry's statement was rather public. That was what Xenia was referring to if I'm not mistaken.

I fully understand them taking action but if this second lawsuit is truly about something that happened years and years ago that seems more like revenge than anything else. And that in itself doesn't look good (even if fully justified; in that case they are mainly on a hunt to find anything to hurt those who hurt them).

The other thing that concerns me is that Harry's statement was released on their private website that hadn't been used before (if I understand it correctly); that - in combination with it being their own money that is being used - raises the question whether the rest of the family agrees with this course of action (or at least statement); because if so, why wasn't it released via the normal channels? Of course, they are their own people and can do as they see fit but at the same time they play a part in a bigger whole (the position they have and the life they want to lead completely depends on it) and if the key players in that 'bigger picture' don't agree with either the statement or the lawsuit itself, it could get complicated.

 

[Madame Verseau]

Here is an interesting opinion piece. Thrashing the Sussexes may not be that profitable

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bl...-to-her-father-wasn-t-much-of-a-money-spinner

I wonder if that is part of the big fight from DM . if it takes a big hit in court the financial damages could be huge.

 

[Somebody]

The letter itself was not published until after five anonymous friends statements were published in the People article and the existence of the letter referred to. That didn't change the fact that neither Mr Markle nor MoS sought copyright permission from Meghan but---the reference to it in the People article does make it newsworthy.

People's sources were anonymous. Were they real? Who are they? If they are real did Meghan give any of them permission to refer to the letter? If I were on defense for the MoS I would be pursuing those questions in court.

And that is why this is so interesting from a legal perspective.

I would even say that because of their friends talking to People Magazine, her relationship with her father became front and center again. It had been all over the media last summer but by fall the focus had shifted to H&M's relationship with W&C. So, yes, it seems that whole interview backfired. But as I said before, it seems they are fed up in general but were advised that this was the best chance to win a lawsuit. However, the implication will be that the whole Markle debacle (that in itself was painful enough) will take center stage again.

 

[ACO]

The letter itself was not published until after five anonymous friends statements were published in the People article and the existence of the letter referred to. That didn't change the fact that neither Mr Markle nor MoS sought copyright permission from Meghan but---the reference to it in the People article does make it newsworthy.

People's sources were anonymous. Were they real? Who are they? If they are real did Meghan give any of them permission to refer to the letter? If I were on defense for the MoS I would be pursuing those questions in court.

And that is why this is so interesting from a legal perspective.

Referencing something is not the same as copyrighting infringement. I can talk about Harry Potter until I am blue in the face but I can't publish pages of it on the internet.

Is the letter newsworthy? Of public interest and interesting to the public are very different things. That will be the only real angle for MoS.

 

[Somebody]

Here is an interesting opinion piece. Thrashing the Sussexes may not be that profitable

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bl...-to-her-father-wasn-t-much-of-a-money-spinner

I wonder if that is part of the big fight from DM . if it takes a big hit in court the financial damages could be huge.

I am afraid there are many legal ways in which they can continue trashing the Sussexes; publishing private communication (letters/phone calls/voice mails) might not be profitable (although I wonder, if they had just asked her father after her friends talked about the letter and he had shared about his correspondence to Meghan without literal citations would that have been ok from a legal perspective?) if these charges stand but I don't think they depend on those for the large majority of their stories.

Referencing something is not the same as copyrighting infringement. I can talk about Harry Potter until I am blue in the face but I can't publish pages of it on the internet.

Is the letter newsworthy? Of public interest and interesting to the public are very different things. That will be the only real angle for MoS.

The difference being that the whole world already knows about Harry Potter and until her friends released this information nobody knew that Meghan wrote to her father and received a letter from him in return. The newsworthy part could be that it shed a light on why Thomas Markle bailed out from his very public role in this very public royal wedding - that was commented upon by the BRF and even led to a change at the wedding day itself with the very unusual move of the prince of Wales taking up her father's part.

So, while it seems most likely that they will win (as I assume their lawyers wouldn't have started this if they didn't think they would win), I wouldn't take it as a given. If the lawyers of the tabloid would have thought it a given, I would imagine they would have settled.

 

[Rudolph]

Here is an interesting opinion piece. Thrashing the Sussexes may not be that profitable

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bl...-to-her-father-wasn-t-much-of-a-money-spinner

I wonder if that is part of the big fight from DM . if it takes a big hit in court the financial damages could be huge.

I agree the titles aren’t nearly as profitable as they once were but the owners still have deep pockets. Viscount Rothermere is worth somewhere around £1.5 billion.

 

[Ista]

I have maintained from the very beginning that the People interview from 5 of Meghan's friends, apparently done with her permission (otherwise how would those 5 friends have known the details of such an intimate letter?) was an absolutely terrible idea, and this is why. The public didn't need to know about Meghan's contact with her father, and the DM certainly didn't need to be tipped off to the existence of the letter. By portraying him in a negative light, Meghan's father had incentive to turn the letter over to the DM to, in his eyes possibly, set the record straight. It's one of several serious lapses in judgment from the Sussexes as has been discussed endlessly on these threads.

I'm not excusing the DM, and I personally hope Meghan prevails in the lawsuit, but there wouldn't have been a lawsuit at all if Meghan's friends had been discreet, and if she had not given them the go-ahead to share the details.

 

[LadyGlendower]

Referencing something is not the same as copyrighting infringement. I can talk about Harry Potter until I am blue in the face but I can't publish pages of it on the internet.

Is the letter newsworthy? Of public interest and interesting to the public are very different things. That will be the only real angle for MoS.

I was not arguing that People had infringed copyright. Civil litigation is decided on a preponderance of evidence and that drives discovery which would probably be allowed re People's sources.

If By "of public interest" you mean for the public good or benefit? Which we don't legally require of the press but we do desire of the press.

Prevailing on the legal points of copyright law is great because that leads to the penalty/payday but the defense has an opportunity in open court to take some significant hide off the plaintiff.

 

[ACO]

Her friends mentioned her letter to rebuttal her father's constant lies saying she never got in contact with him. No one went into great details about it said. Thomas mentioned the other letters and gave the tabloid hers. Again it is interesting to the public but is it truly of public interest? That is the argument the MoS has to prove vs copyright from what I have gathered listening to the experts.

Also wasn't there an attempt to settle according to the reports? They just couldn't come to terms which is why it is pushing forward. Each side will defend themselves and the courts will decide.

I have maintained from the very beginning that the People interview from 5 of Meghan's friends, apparently done with her permission (otherwise how would those 5 friends have known the details of such an intimate letter?) was an absolutely terrible idea, and this is why. The public didn't need to know about Meghan's contact with her father, and the DM certainly didn't need to be tipped off to the existence of the letter. By portraying him in a negative light, Meghan's father had incentive to turn the letter over to the DM to, in his eyes possibly, set the record straight. It's one of several serious lapses in judgment from the Sussexes as has been discussed endlessly on these threads.

I'm not excusing the DM, and I personally hope Meghan prevails in the lawsuit, but there wouldn't have been a lawsuit at all if Meghan's friends had been discreet, and if she had not given them the go-ahead to share the details.

You might be right but at the same time Thomas was spreading lies about Meghan while also attacking her family, including her mother. People were believing him. We don't know that dynamic and while it is easy to say stay quiet it would seem it was not easy for her. So while this lawsuit seems extreme it could bring closure in a lot of ways for Meghan. I mean at least after he gave the letter away people stopped going to him because he has exposed himself as a liar. No doubt her legal team weighed all their options before pushing forward.

Either way Thomas and that paper still had a choice and they too made it.