Related Articles
Picture by Pete Maclaine / i-Images
The Mail on Sunday has admitted defeat after losing their appeal in a lawsuit brought by the Duchess of Sussex for copyright three years ago.
The Mail printed a statement at the bottom of its front page, saying it had infringed on Meghan’s copyright by publishing a copy of the letter she sent her father, Thomas Markle. Their 64-word piece – also on the Mail’s website – included links to copies of the judgment by the courts.
Mail on Sunday publishers, Associated Newspapers, will also pay “financial remedies” to the Duchess of Sussex. They said in their statement that “financial remedies have been agreed.”
The statement by the Mail said: “Following a hearing on 19-20 January 2021, and a further hearing on 5 May 2021, the Court has given judgment for The Duchess of Sussex on her claim for copyright infringement. The Court found that Associated Newspapers infringed her copyright by publishing extracts of her handwritten letter to her father in The Mail on Sunday and in Mail Online. Financial remedies have been agreed.”
Meghan called her victory one “not just for me, but for anyone who has ever felt scared to stand up for what’s right.”
At the beginning of the month, the Mail on Sunday lost its appeal against a ruling that it breached privacy and copyright by publishing extracts of a letter sent by the Duchess of Sussex to her father, Thomas Markle.
Associated Newspapers, which owns the Mail on Sunday, had appealed against an earlier court ruling to grant a summary judgement to the Duchess over her claims. They had wanted the matter to go to trial.
Three Appeal Court judges ruled that the summary judgement should be upheld. They said: ”The articles in the Mail on Sunday interfered with the duchess’ reasonable expectation of privacy and were not a justified or proportionate means of correcting inaccuracies about the letter.”
They added that it was difficult to see what evidence included in a trial would change that decision and that while using a small part of the letter might have been admissible, ”it was not necessary to publish half the contents of the letter.”
Additional reporting by Lydia Starbuck
Source link
