Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread

Seems the US laws are similar to UK, but I am not an attorney so do check with your attorney before publishing anything :happydance:
ETA: TM lives in Mexico - does that change anything?

A personal letter is subject to copyright protection – regardless of whether the letter is published or unpublished. In most cases, the writer of the letter is the copyright owner of the letter. As the recipient of the letter, you exercise control over the tangible copy which you may keep, sell, or discard. However, you do not have the right to reproduce, publish, or exercise any of the copyright owner’s other exclusive rights in the letter.

There have been lawsuits over the unauthorized use of personal letters. For example, an unauthorized biography of J.D. Salinger was enjoined after the author included extensive verbatim passages of Salinger’s unpublished letters without Salinger’s permission.

Also, if the letters include information that qualifies as “private”, you must also consider privacy issues in addition to copyright law issues before doing anything with the letters.


but again, I think DM lawyers were going along the lines of, if she had it mind to discuss on the merits of calling him 'Daddy' with a view of "tug at heartstrings" with a Palace official. Was the letter actually leaked by TM/DM or did her anticipation of the public's perception constitute her own co-conspiracy to create a letter in the manner of private when actually writing a public document.
 
Pathetic, Lady Megbeth is so hungry to get her name on the net, we are “treated” to a New Year’s Day article about her special “symbolic jewelry” purchased in 2020 for $20,000. :sleepy:
Oh, that's just a pittance for Her Heinous. She'll probably just wear it once to merch.

I was relooking at the Time cover after noticing all that photoshopping on the holiday card. It always bothered me how unbalanced and disproportionate both of them looked. Does anyone think Methane's exceedingly hirsute head was pasted on that body? The head always looked too big to me and had a "pop-out" vibe. Maybe it was a similar case as in Composite Baby: they pasted the head and had to enlarge it as well as add extra hair to cover the original less desirable head/expression.
 
Oh, that's just a pittance for Her Heinous. She'll probably just wear it once to merch.

I was relooking at the Time cover after noticing all that photoshopping on the holiday card. It always bothered me how unbalanced and disproportionate both of them looked. Does anyone think Methane's exceedingly hirsute head was pasted on that body? The head always looked too big to me and had a "pop-out" vibe. Maybe it was a similar case as in Composite Baby: they pasted the head and had to enlarge it as well as add extra hair to cover the original less desirable head/expression.
Yes, i sometimes wonder if we have ever seen what she really looks like. Probably the picture of her showing some bald scalp taken on one of her outings with the Queen is the most accurate one.
 
Sounds like they’re looking to move?

Perhaps they can no longer afford the house and property. It must suck up money like a wood chipper.
 
Sounds like they’re looking to move?


But they said that was going to be their forever home! Does having a second child mean that 16 bathrooms is no longer enough? :lol:
 
First property tax payment was due Dec 1, delinquent after the 10th. Second installment due February 1. Might have been a shock, especially with Charles’ checkbook reportedly closed, no Spotify or Netflix productions, and a decrepit Bench sitting in the Amazon basement.
They definitely did not expect the running cost. I'm wondering - with all the bragging about their Netflix and Spotify multimillion dollar deals and JCMH's multiple jobs, will the income tax folks also be scrutinizing their submissions?