From The Florida Masochist:
The heir to the British throne is suing a newspaper for publishing parts of his personal diary. That dastardly tabloid media, right! So why give the Prince a knucklehead? He gave copies of his personal diary to eleven diary. How personal is that diary? Not very in my opinion and if Charles didn’t want it leaked you keep it away from others. How dumb is this man?
The tabloids, publishing material they were given? Who would have guessed!
LONDON — Prince Charles took legal action Friday against a British newspaper that published details from his private journal, which included his description of Chinese officials as “appalling old waxworks.”
The prince’s office said it had lodged papers at the High Court against Associated Newspapers, publishers of the Mail on Sunday, for breach of confidentiality and copyright.
Britain’s Prince Charles sips tea from a Liverpool FC soccer club mug whilst sitting in the Home changing room during a visit to the club’s Anfield ground, in Liverpool, England, Friday, Nov. 18, 2005. Prince Charles is taking legal action against a newspaper which published details from his private journals, his office said Friday. Charles is taking action against Associated Newspapers, publishers of the Mail on Sunday, which printed details of the prince’s view of the British handover of Hong Kong to China in 1997. (AP Photo/Phil Noble/WPA pool) (Phil Noble – AP)
The journal, entitled “The Handover of Hong Kong, or The Great Chinese Takeaway,” contained the heir to the British throne’s views on the 1997 transfer of Hong Kong to the Chinese.
The prince’s office, Clarence House, said Charles sent 11 copies of the journal to close friends, and the newspaper obtained a copy without his permission.
Sir Michael Peat, Charles’s principal private secretary, said the newspaper was warned repeatedly not to publish the extracts.
“We have made this clear to the Mail on Sunday on five occasions, both orally and in writing,” he said. “Nevertheless, the Mail on Sunday proceeded to publish these extracts despite the knowledge that it was a breach of the Prince of Wales’s copyright and confidence.”
In a statement, the Mail on Sunday said the story did not involve any breach of copyright or confidentiality.
“This was not a private journal. It was widely distributed and viewed, as Clarence House confirmed to us, as a historic document intended for eventual publication,” the newspaper said, adding that the story “raised important questions about Britain’s relations with China.”