To wonder what the point of an injunctions is?

[LikeDylanInTheMovies]

In the age of social media and access to news sources across the globe, it seems absurd to a layperson that a ruling that only applies to England and Wales would serve to keep a lid on a story? Anyone interested in discovering the identity of the person concerned can find out who the people involved are with a few taps of their keyboard.

Likewise in PR terms it seems a disaster, would it not have been better to just say ' yes we have an open relationship, both parties are happy with that and it is nobody else's concern, but we are disappointed people we considered friends sought to profit from our private life' rather than stirring up even more interest and gossip via an injunction that was never likely to be effective. I have no interest in who celebrities sleep with, but my interest was piqued by the heavy handed and ultimately futile injunction.

Is there anyone with experience of the legal/PR industries think of these injunctions? Are they an expensive waste of time or can they be effective in furnishing celebrities with a degree of privacy?

I bet there is another attempt to lfe it by a Sunday newspaper going on today hoping they can publish tomorrow.

The couple should just let them get on with it and get it over with. It is out there- Daily Mail published it with key words blacked out, links on Twitter to the unexpurgated version, photos of USA front pages - lurid headlines, photos and detail. Injunction is pointless.

It does make you wonder about the relationship, their choices, what knd of people they are but that isn't the point. The point is the legal aspect of the injunction- the ludicrousness of a system that stops our Press publishing something that their readers read at the click of a button elsewhere.

Is there a question about right to privacy? The answer is the privacy has gone anyway. The injunction is not protecting anyone.

Is there a question about reputation? It's pretty much shot with anyone who cares I imagine- the stuff is out there.

The injunction is empty.

I sometimes think Mumsnet is actually just an extensive advertising front for the DM, given the amount of times it gets mentioned in threads!
Anyway...
It took me less than two minutes to find the details of the parties behind the superinjunction online. Superinjunctions work differently to 'standard' mandatory or prohibitory injunctions, which are useful legal tools. Superinjunctions are a waste of money and court time and are imposed by judges with little understanding of how fast and extensive social media and the Internet is. The only teeth they have left is how hard they will come down on the first person to let slip. Everyone knows, but nobody will admit they know. It's Alice in Wonderland stuff.

Do you lot really hate Mumsnet this much?

It's a little bit funny, isn't it soup!