|
Post by paca on Jul 16, 2012 13:59:32 GMT -5
rofl oh don't they always. How often have we all been threatened? Even by Eringer at the red forum?and how many lawsuits have actually followed? someones been at the crack to much again? btw in Germany he will have a hard time sueing these days as with his publicly kissing his wife on a state visit, he has made his private life a matter of public discussion. Hence the media in Germany can write whatever they like about their relationship as he has dragged it himself into public light, not the media. he might even come across judges who would find him guilty of abusing the courts to control the media. You can not attempt to use the media in your favour and sue them when they are not willing to write what you want people to read. I really wish he would have it out in German courts at the Verfassungsgericht. I think the recent president might just replace the Caroline judgement II by an Albert II judgement... So then they should sue the sugars and BUNTE too! It is a private matter if Charlene is pregnant or not and whether she and Albert are in love or not and whether she is happy or depressed. So if they speculate about Charlene surely getting pregnant soon and loving Albert so much - this is private too! Some matters are private or not - no matter if media report positive or negative about. One could ask why they don't sue the sugars too for insulting privacy - if they don't do it becomes obvious that it is not about privacy at all... actually they would have to sue any publication, good or bad, that mentions their private life. I wonder why none of the lawyers of the media has never brought that as an argument and outed their sueing as a matter of censorship. In Germany Caro only succeeded with regards to pictures, not content of the article. Plus she has been affirmed as a public person.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jul 16, 2012 14:01:20 GMT -5
JMO faTal would have been so much more interesting if he'd been the first openly gay prince, instead of marrying an ugly tranny with no style, no grace and NO HOPE of ever getting any (come on it's been 10 years, clearly it's hopeless) Countess- Albert stood on the boat trip in Berlin right between the gay Major of Berlin and the gay Foreign Minister of Germany - with Trashy... Wonder what he has been thinking... That he missed the boat? Good point, Paca, about the blanket privacy issue.
|
|
|
Post by hibou on Jul 16, 2012 15:05:52 GMT -5
rofl oh don't they always. How often have we all been threatened? Even by Eringer at the red forum?and how many lawsuits have actually followed? someones been at the crack to much again? btw in Germany he will have a hard time sueing these days as with his publicly kissing his wife on a state visit, he has made his private life a matter of public discussion. Hence the media in Germany can write whatever they like about their relationship as he has dragged it himself into public light, not the media. he might even come across judges who would find him guilty of abusing the courts to control the media. You can not attempt to use the media in your favour and sue them when they are not willing to write what you want people to read. I really wish he would have it out in German courts at the Verfassungsgericht. I think the recent president might just replace the Caroline judgement II by an Albert II judgement... So then they should sue the sugars and BUNTE too! It is a private matter if Charlene is pregnant or not and whether she and Albert are in love or not and whether she is happy or depressed. So if they speculate about Charlene surely getting pregnant soon and loving Albert so much - this is private too! Some matters are private or not - no matter if media report positive or negative about. One could ask why they don't sue the sugars too for insulting privacy - if they don't do it becomes obvious that it is not about privacy at all... Unfortunately, all your arguments are far too logical and sane - Albert is not thinking at all but acting like a spoiled brat if you ask me, and since he has the money to sue, he does. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jul 16, 2012 15:16:57 GMT -5
So then they should sue the sugars and BUNTE too! It is a private matter if Charlene is pregnant or not and whether she and Albert are in love or not and whether she is happy or depressed. So if they speculate about Charlene surely getting pregnant soon and loving Albert so much - this is private too! Some matters are private or not - no matter if media report positive or negative about. One could ask why they don't sue the sugars too for insulting privacy - if they don't do it becomes obvious that it is not about privacy at all... actually they would have to sue any publication, good or bad, that mentions their private life. I wonder why none of the lawyers of the media has never brought that as an argument and outed their sueing as a matter of censorship. In Germany Caro only succeeded with regards to pictures, not content of the article. Plus she has been affirmed as a public person. ... we are simply the best And ... it doesn't matter if it's far too logic for C&A ... it could work on court. What is more private than love or pregnancy? Either way
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jul 16, 2012 15:23:41 GMT -5
Countess- Albert stood on the boat trip in Berlin right between the gay Major of Berlin and the gay Foreign Minister of Germany - with Trashy... Wonder what he has been thinking... LOL Alberts personal Christopher street day ;D though on the boat it was Westerwelle and Mronz, his husband. The mayor was later at the Brandenburgertor Even better
|
|
|
Post by paca on Jul 16, 2012 15:47:36 GMT -5
actually they would have to sue any publication, good or bad, that mentions their private life. I wonder why none of the lawyers of the media has never brought that as an argument and outed their sueing as a matter of censorship. In Germany Caro only succeeded with regards to pictures, not content of the article. Plus she has been affirmed as a public person. ... we are simply the best And ... it doesn't matter if it's far too logic for C&A ... it could work on court. What is more private than love or pregnancy? Either way I think since it is a heriditary system a pregnancy is not a private matter. Neither is a wedding which was the actual argument of Le Point for initially publishing their article. And they have not retracted anything.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jul 16, 2012 17:48:36 GMT -5
Oops...posted before switching threads
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jul 17, 2012 2:23:25 GMT -5
... we are simply the best And ... it doesn't matter if it's far too logic for C&A ... it could work on court. What is more private than love or pregnancy? Either way I think since it is a heriditary system a pregnancy is not a private matter. Neither is a wedding which was the actual argument of Le Point for initially publishing their article. And they have not retracted anything. Pregnancy in a heriditary system and most of all marriage of a Head of State: Agree... That means if we are speculating on RO about Cherlenes male body and her obvious problems with getting pregnant ... this is a public matter. Right. Including her obvious botox addiction!!! Because this is a serious threat to the health and even live of a unborn. But all the other things like fake vs. love plastic vs. beauty depression vs. happiness are private - aren't they?
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jul 17, 2012 16:18:42 GMT -5
A good lawyer finds a loophole in any argument. Paca missed her calling obviously
|
|
|
Post by MyAdia on Jul 18, 2012 15:11:04 GMT -5
LOL it only says that it touched their private life. There is not a whiff about it being wrong. That said you can still consider the statements of the article as correct, only that they are private and thus can not be published, but we can discuss it in private, in forums, etc except in anything resembling a journalists publication and for money....I consider this a win in favour of VSD and us on the board But Albert and Charlene are hoping that people are just as stupid as they are and not make that difference. Here's one such stupid person in Monaco's media ( Podcast Journal) praising the judgment as a win against the rumors that Albert and Charlene vigorously denied. Note to stupid person, if Albert was really concern about the information being false he would have sued for defamation and libel - and the court would have ruled on that issue - and not invasion of privacy. I would love to read Albert's submission and the court's full ruling - I will bet you anything Albert did not argue for defamation and false information and that the court did not rule that the information was false.
A legal development The French magazine VSD just learned the hard way that everything is not good to say and TSH Albert II of Monaco and his wife Charlene have him well informed. Like other publications, VSD had spoken of tensions within their e couple, about which were vigorously refuted by the parties and their lawyers. The weekly has been convicted and an insert in the magazine cover says "By judgment dated June 28, 2012, the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Nanterre ordered the company for publishing VOD in their number, dating from July 7, 2011 , an article infringing the rights to respect for private life and image of Albert Grimaldi and Charlene Wittstock, wife Grimaldi ".
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jul 18, 2012 18:42:49 GMT -5
Something so vigorously denied such as tensions in their relationship only cement the impression in people's minds that in fact, something's amiss. Thou dost protest too much...?
|
|