Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
OP posts:
Thread gallery
38
Original poster
Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 09/12/2023 07:03

Xander’s statement is simple: we translated the book UTA (on behalf of OS, which under agency principles = OS) gave us to translate for publication in Dutch, and no more or less.

OS’s dispute with UTA - if the latter didn’t follow OS’s instructions- is not the legal problem of Xander, the RF or any other third party.

OP posts:
FinallyFinalGirl · 09/12/2023 07:21

Somehow I don’t think he’s the best person to front that campaign

Oh my. I had no idea he did that....ok, he's just plummeted further in my estimation. I have zero respect for anyone who abuses animals.

Abra1t · 09/12/2023 07:47

Chouxpastryishard · 09/12/2023 03:34

It’s a very well known photo of Harry. It’s distasteful but compared with what we see on the news every day hardly that shocking .

Show quote history

Or even what you see driving down a country road in terms of roadkill.

Maireas · 09/12/2023 08:32

The Africa thing is interesting. I heard him say (before he met Meghan) that he wanted to go and live in Africa and work with wildlife/conservation. I suspect that he had happy times there with Chelsey. What I don't understand is why he and Chelsey never married. Her refusal was because she didn't want the royal lifestyle, so why didn't he give it up, marry her and live in Africa? I suspect that he always wanted the titles, status and privilege and wanted some sort of half in/half out arrangement, rather than live a non royal life with Chelsey.

parksandrecs · 09/12/2023 08:38

Maybe she didn't want to marry him!

I can imagine it might have been fun for a while, when you don't see each other too often and the time you spend together is partying, and you're in the stage of your life where having fun and partying are your priorities.

But then your priorities change, and you want something different and start looking at your boy/girlfriend as a potential lifetime partner... and they look very different!

Maireas · 09/12/2023 08:44

Very true, @parksandrecs , they were young when they met. However, reports were that they split up finally because she didn't want a royal life.
Anyway, Chelsey has always been very discreet and private, so we'll never know for sure.

Getthethrowonthesofa · 09/12/2023 08:50

The statement from the Dutch publisher is really concerning as the only thing it can mean is they approved that for publication and they named Charles and kate on purpose.

they are saying this was the final version. Not an early version. That scobie has made a factually incorrect statement. He’s lied.

if those names have been put out their on purpose, which is the implication. Then there is more to come on this.

sashagabadon · 09/12/2023 08:56

Why would publishers/ translators want a first draft that is likely to be changed anyway? What is the benefit? It doesn’t save them time in fact probably costs time as they have to dump the first translation or at least triple check it when given the final translation so they don’t make mistakes. What a hassle. I’d rather just have final agreed version and translate that.

Getthethrowonthesofa · 09/12/2023 09:09

sashagabadon · 09/12/2023 08:56

Why would publishers/ translators want a first draft that is likely to be changed anyway? What is the benefit? It doesn’t save them time in fact probably costs time as they have to dump the first translation or at least triple check it when given the final translation so they don’t make mistakes. What a hassle. I’d rather just have final agreed version and translate that.

That’s normal to be fair, it takes a long time to translate a full book, as it’s not just translation literally you need to them check the intent stands, so others reading it, hence why two translators. Any changes are then provided ie page 7, paragraph 2, change from x to y, and that’s relatively quick.

if you had to wait till the extensive legal check done before even starting it would delay it by months and months,

Original poster
Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 09/12/2023 09:13

It might just be the very simple mistake of the agent attaching the wrong file when sending Xander the manuscript. If nobody knew what had been sent and received was an early draft, nobody would have been checking/editing/getting legal approval etc. Scobie is continuing with his narrative that this has been done to him, as if he is the victim of something. Whereas, it might just be an honest, human error.

What is not an error, though, is that Scobie's initial intent was to reveal the names. He was told legally that this was not advisable. But his intent is quite clear, and he confirmed this in his interviews. He wanted to know why M&H stopped talking about the royal racism allegation after Oprah. He wanted to delve into what is, for all intents and purposes, a private family matter that all parties involved have either stated or implied they wanted to stay a private family matter.

Which comes to the misuse of private information legislation, and whether a case could be formulated under that legislation, rather than defamation. This would make a fascinating case.

OP posts:
smilesy · 09/12/2023 09:16

Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 09/12/2023 09:13

It might just be the very simple mistake of the agent attaching the wrong file when sending Xander the manuscript. If nobody knew what had been sent and received was an early draft, nobody would have been checking/editing/getting legal approval etc. Scobie is continuing with his narrative that this has been done to him, as if he is the victim of something. Whereas, it might just be an honest, human error.

What is not an error, though, is that Scobie's initial intent was to reveal the names. He was told legally that this was not advisable. But his intent is quite clear, and he confirmed this in his interviews. He wanted to know why M&H stopped talking about the royal racism allegation after Oprah. He wanted to delve into what is, for all intents and purposes, a private family matter that all parties involved have either stated or implied they wanted to stay a private family matter.

Which comes to the misuse of private information legislation, and whether a case could be formulated under that legislation, rather than defamation. This would make a fascinating case.

It also still begs the question as to where he did originally get the names from and whether they are indeed the correct names, as this has been left hanging by the Sussexes. They claim that no one spoke to Scobie for the book, but again this is semantics and doesn’t mean that he wasn’t spoken to at all

Original poster
Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 09/12/2023 09:23

Scobie's claim is that the names were common knowledge in Fleet Street. He would need to prove that claim; or come clean that the information came from within the RF or the Sussex household, and that one of those parties revealed their own private business to him.

OP posts:
StartupRepair · 09/12/2023 09:24

Not really a private family matter when announced on Oprah.

Original poster
Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 09/12/2023 09:26

The names were private, and the exact content of the conversations remains private. The contents of the letters remain private (although their existence was helpfully leaked to the Telegraph earlier this year). No proof whatsoever has been provided that those conversations render the parties in question racist. Harry said it was not racism. Scobie has used all of this private content to form a narrative about racism.

OP posts:
Getthethrowonthesofa · 09/12/2023 09:27

Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 09/12/2023 09:13

It might just be the very simple mistake of the agent attaching the wrong file when sending Xander the manuscript. If nobody knew what had been sent and received was an early draft, nobody would have been checking/editing/getting legal approval etc. Scobie is continuing with his narrative that this has been done to him, as if he is the victim of something. Whereas, it might just be an honest, human error.

What is not an error, though, is that Scobie's initial intent was to reveal the names. He was told legally that this was not advisable. But his intent is quite clear, and he confirmed this in his interviews. He wanted to know why M&H stopped talking about the royal racism allegation after Oprah. He wanted to delve into what is, for all intents and purposes, a private family matter that all parties involved have either stated or implied they wanted to stay a private family matter.

Which comes to the misuse of private information legislation, and whether a case could be formulated under that legislation, rather than defamation. This would make a fascinating case.

I doubt that to be honest, and Scobie would know and say that, as long as he didn’t send it to the Dutch publisher, he is in the clear.

thing is it will be under Dutch law, not uk law, or US law. It really is starting to look like they decided to publish in the Netherlands. knowing it would then be leaked across the world. What are the odds of the palace suing them in the Netherlands for libel. Close to zero.

Original poster
Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 09/12/2023 09:43

I'm not talking about libel, I am talking about misuse of private information (which is legislation that stems from EC human rights conventions, and which will have mirror legislation across the EU). It's an interesting issue to ponder if you enjoy legal stuff, but probably not one for this thread. I agree the palace will highly likely not be suing anyone - OS's disastrous utterances and the Sussex silence are doing the job for them.

as long as he didn’t send it to the Dutch publisher, he is in the clear.

That's not how agency works. The agent represents the principal. The Dutch publisher would be right to rely on whatever the agent sent to them or said to them as being instructions from OS. If the agent made a mistake, that's a matter between OS and the agent.

OP posts:
Original poster
Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 09/12/2023 09:57

Also, from a contractual point of view, I would assume OS's English agent would use a licence governed by the laws of England and Wales. From the point of view of conflict of jurisdictions in a contractual claim - in the case of a claim made between OS/his agent/Xander - the contract would usually name jurisdiction, and I would be surprised if this is not England and Wales.

OP posts:
Getthethrowonthesofa · 09/12/2023 11:10

Good points op. I think it is the us agent who has subcontracted to the other markets, I’m not sure though and yes, it would possibly be under their markets law.

im not quite aligned on scobie being responsible if the agent made an error. The agent commits contractually to do certain acts. It is not for the author to then audit them to ensure they did, they have a right to a reasonable expectation the agent can carry out the duties they agreed to. If the agent failed, they are responsible. Not the author for not going into their business and checking.

i think it’s moot though, it’s clear the Dutch agent has said Scobie has made a factual statement , the clear implication being this was the final version cleared for release in the Netherlands.

Original poster
Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 09/12/2023 11:39

Good points op. I think it is the us agent who has subcontracted to the other markets, I’m not sure though and yes, it would possibly be under their markets law.

I'm pretty sure one of the reports described it as his "UK agent", UTA. I agree, if this is just the UK office of UTA USA (rather than a separate English governed legal entity), then the licensing contracts to the foreign language publications may be governed by a US state law.

im not quite aligned on scobie being responsible if the agent made an error. The agent commits contractually to do certain acts. It is not for the author to then audit them to ensure they did, they have a right to a reasonable expectation the agent can carry out the duties they agreed to. If the agent failed, they are responsible. Not the author for not going into their business and checking.

There's a difference between OS and UTA's legal relationship and the relationship between Xander and UTA/OS. The whole point of agency is that third parties can reasonably assume that the agent is working under the instructions of the principal. In this instance, Xander have the reasonable expectation that anything they were instructed to do by UTA is the instruction of OS. Further, Xander's contractual relationship is going to be with OS, not UTA. If Xander were to sue OS relying on the contract, then I think they would be successful, even if their instructions from OS came via a third party. It would then be up to OS to in turn sue UTA for breach of their contractual/legal relationship, and he'd need to show that UTA went rogue and did something either negligent or completely contrary to OS's instructions.

OP posts:
JSMill · 09/12/2023 11:41

LaurieStrode · 09/12/2023 01:54

Could really have done without that dead animal photo. Hope it gave you some sick thrill to post it without a trigger warning.

Please ask MNHQ to remove it.

Why? People should know what goes on in the world.

FuckHonestlyKnows · 09/12/2023 13:07

I think everyone knows that animals sometimes die 🙄🙄

LadyWhineglass · 09/12/2023 13:37

Endgame is number 21 in the US charts having sold 8K copies in the first week.

cocolocopocos · 09/12/2023 13:54

8000 copies sold in a population of 330 million? Seems unlikely to shift the dial

AutumnCrow · 09/12/2023 13:58

LadyWhineglass · 09/12/2023 13:37

Endgame is number 21 in the US charts having sold 8K copies in the first week.

Do you know which chart, specifically?

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread