Meghan wins ruling in Mail on Sunday privacy fight

Watch
-Eirlys-
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
The Duchess of Sussex has won the latest stage in her legal fight against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday over a letter she sent to her father.

The Court of Appeal rejected Associated Newspapers' attempt to have a trial in the privacy and copyright case.

Meghan said it was a win "not just for me, but for anyone who has ever felt scared to stand up for what's right".

Associated Newspapers said it was disappointed, and was considering a further appeal to the Supreme Court.

A judge had previously ruled in favour of Meghan after extracts from the letter appeared in the paper.

In a statement issued after the ruling, the duchess urged people to be "brave enough to reshape a tabloid industry that... profits from the lies and pain that they create".

Read more here.
0
reply
The RAR
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
I wish people stopped calling her by royalty, she is no royalty, she gave that up long ago. Meghan is a vile woman that ironically accuses others of lies when she has many of her own lies to hide.
2
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
(Original post by The RAR)
I wish people stopped calling her by royalty, she is no royalty, she gave that up long ago. Meghan is a vile woman that ironically accuses others of lies when she has many of her own lies to hide.
You don't really know that she's 'vile' do you, you are just basing your opinions on whatever distorted media outlets you get your information from.
0
reply
TCA2b
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by The RAR)
I wish people stopped calling her by royalty, she is no royalty, she gave that up long ago. Meghan is a vile woman that ironically accuses others of lies when she has many of her own lies to hide.
Agreed. Severe case of narcissism imo.
3
reply
YaliaV123
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
Meghan loves to play the victim.
1
reply
The RAR
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
You don't really know that she's 'vile' do you, you are just basing your opinions on whatever distorted media outlets you get your information from.
She loves defaming others and loves being the centre of attention with the constant, endless drama she produces. Her history isn't bright either. I stand by my fact that she is vile.
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
Who?
3
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by The RAR)
She loves defaming others and loves being the centre of attention with the constant, endless drama she produces. Her history isn't bright either. I stand by my fact that she is vile.
I agree that she has seemed eager to attack at times, but I'm not sure that makes her 'vile'. Perhaps she's just very attention-seeking.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
(Original post by The RAR)
I wish people stopped calling her by royalty, she is no royalty, she gave that up long ago. Meghan is a vile woman that ironically accuses others of lies when she has many of her own lies to hide.
Vile people have copyright too.
0
reply
Joleee
Badges: 19
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 1 month ago
#10
does anyone actually want to talk about the article or the judgment or the right to privacy and how it was wrong for the paper to publish a personal letter and what precedent it sets in UK law or we just want to take the opportunity to ***** about how we don't like Meghan Markle :cookie:
2
reply
Surnia
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by Joleee)
does anyone actually want to talk about the article or the judgment or the right to privacy and how it was wrong for the paper to publish a personal letter and what precedent it sets in UK law or we just want to take the opportunity to ***** about how we don't like Meghan Markle :cookie:
Ridiculous judgement. Why does she consider a letter that she sent to someone else to be her property and she can dictate what happens to the content?
0
reply
Joleee
Badges: 19
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
(Original post by Surnia)
Ridiculous judgement. Why does she consider a letter that she sent to someone else to be her property and she can dictate what happens to the content?
because it's her property as she wrote the letter. what makes it public property
0
reply
Surnia
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
(Original post by Joleee)
because it's her property as she wrote the letter. what makes it public property
She keeps the letter, it's her property. She sends the letter to her father, it's then his to do with what he chooses.
0
reply
Joleee
Badges: 19
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
(Original post by Surnia)
She keeps the letter, it's her property. She sends the letter to her father, it's then his to do with what he chooses.
no sorry my dude, not true under law and you didn't answer my question
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
(Original post by Surnia)
She keeps the letter, it's her property. She sends the letter to her father, it's then his to do with what he chooses.
What, to then sell it to the media? Come on.
0
reply
StriderHort
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
(Original post by Surnia)
She keeps the letter, it's her property. She sends the letter to her father, it's then his to do with what he chooses.
Yeah.. that doesn't sound quite right How would that fit with say, revenge porn legislation?
0
reply
Surnia
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
So if you're slandered in public you can't provide evidence in public to the contrary?
What about the article in 'People' magazine to which Thomas Markle said he was responding?

Isn't it also double standards to complain about the letter when you then reveal the content of private conversations on a chat show with Oprah Winfrey?
0
reply
looloo2134
Badges: 15
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
Report 1 month ago
#18
(Original post by TCA2b)
Agreed. Severe case of narcissism imo.
She's an actress they are know for being narcissists and over privileged. She is like spoilt child having a temper tantrum.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#19
Report 1 month ago
#19
(Original post by Surnia)
She keeps the letter, it's her property. She sends the letter to her father, it's then his to do with what he chooses.
That isn't right.

If this letter was sent hard copy, then the piece of paper belongs to father.

That doesn't give him (or any third party) copyright in the letter, so neither he nor anyone else can publish the contents, unless it falls within an exception, without Meghan's consent.

The law of copyright doesn't stop father putting the piece of paper up for sale at Sothebys. Plenty of unpublished literary manuscripts are sold without copyright as collectors' items.

However, separately Meghan asserts that the letter was subject to a duty of confidentality which prevents father from disseminating the contents of the letter. If so that prevents him from passing on the contents even in the form of the piece of paper. Like copyright there are exceptiions and the court has said that the relevant exceptions are the same. Father can use relevant material from the letter to show that what had been said about him was untrue. But the right to publish is limited to that which is necessary to rebut the allegation. It doesn't give you the right to pirate the whole work.
(Original post by Surnia)
So if you're slandered in public you can't provide evidence in public to the contrary? NO
What about the article in 'People' magazine to which Thomas Markle said he was responding? The court saw through that. The Mail didn't need to reproduce half the entire document to rebut the People article. One sentence would have done it. The court saw that the Mail was simplying pirating the letter for commercial reasons.

Isn't it also double standards to complain about the letter when you then reveal the content of private conversations on a chat show with Oprah Winfrey? So what? If any of the people with whom Meghan was conversing thought that their privacy was infringed, they could sue if they were minded to.
Jeffrey Archer is a convicted perjurer. It doesn't mean you can pirate any of his books or reveal his sweet nothings to Mary.
Last edited by nulli tertius; 1 month ago
0
reply
Surnia
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#20
Report 1 month ago
#20
(Original post by nulli tertius)
That isn't right.

If this letter was sent hard copy, then the piece of paper belongs to father.

That doesn't give him (or any third party) copyright in the letter, so neither he nor anyone else can publish the contents, unless it falls within an exception, without Meghan's consent.

The law of copyright doesn't stop father putting the piece of paper up for sale at Sothebys. Plenty of unpublished literary manuscripts are sold without copyright as collectors' items.

However, separately Meghan asserts that the letter was subject to a duty of confidentality which prevents father from disseminating the contents of the letter. If so that prevents him from passing on the contents even in the form of the piece of paper. Like copyright there are exceptiions and the court has said that the relevant exceptions are the same. Father can use relevant material from the letter to show that what had been said about him was untrue. But the right to publish is limited to that which is necessary to rebut the allegation. It doesn't give you the right to pirate the whole work.

Jeffrey Archer is a convicted perjurer. It doesn't mean you can pirate any of his books or reveal his sweet nothings to Mary.
But it's OK for friends of Meghan to reveal the contents of the letter? Plus the whole letter wasn't published, only extracts, about which Meghan also complained, saying it was biased.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you ever considered or are you currently considering an apprenticeship?

Yes, I am actively considering an apprenticeship (51)
12.2%
I am actively considering an alternative to uni that isn't an apprenticeship (8)
1.91%
I have considered an apprenticeship but it's not for me (106)
25.36%
I am considering a degree apprenticeship (38)
9.09%
I haven't considered an apprenticeship (200)
47.85%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (15)
3.59%

Watched Threads

View All