Judge releases Prince Charles’s diaries

[CHIMO]

LONDON — Prince Charles wasn’t happy about being forced to sit in an “uncomfortable” seat in business class on a flight to Hong Kong. But he didn’t want the world to know about it.

The heir to the throne is seeking to block publication of diaries he kept during trips abroad. But so far the exercise in protecting royal privacy has been a flop.

A judge on Wednesday ordered the immediate release of a 1997 journal, which revealed the prince’s dislike of the Chinese leadership, his view of U.S. and British politicians and his chagrin at having to fly business class.

“I then discovered that (politicians) were comfortably ensconced in first class immediately below us,” he wrote. “Such is the end of the Empire, I sighed to myself.’’

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1140692529999&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724

[htuttle]

1. Thanks for posting this

Now Steve Bell's recent cartoon makes more sense.

[MuseRider]

2. Yes it does.

I was wondering what that was all about.

[htuttle]

3. If Charles would have really thought about it

He would have remembered that the really High Powered Corporate Types get their OWN Learjets, with Chefs!

Then it REALLY would have hit him what the 'end of empire' meant...

[DianeG5385]

4. This sucks. I don't care who it is

I predict that the historian's job will be severely compromised from here on forward, as NO ONE will keep written records. Look at Bush for G's sake!

[arikara]

14. I thought it was his personal journal

but he copied and distributed it. That's like letting a genie out of the bottle. I'm not judging whether it was right or wrong, but it was inevitable that it gets out into public.

The prince’s lawyers say the document, intended for distribution to a few close friends, was leaked by a former palace employee. They are claiming invasion of privacy and copyright infringement, and are seeking to stop the newspaper publishing the seven other journals.

Telling even one person a secret... its not a secret anymore. Likewise anything that you say over a telephone or email can become public if anyone is interested in what you are doing. With the embarassing revelations that have come out before on Chuck remember him wanting to be a tampax? you'd really think he would have learned his lesson.

[hughee99]

5. This sounds to me like privacy rights

are being eroded across the pond as well.

[Daphne08]

10. I agree. No one should have to turn over personal writings

until he/she explicitly wishes to do so.

This is wrong, in my opinion.

[dubya_dubya_III]

6. Sure beats me

How anyone could have any interest whatsoever in the demented ravings of this racist eugenic christian fascist tribal mafia warlord in waiting.

[NashVegas]

7. I'm Divided

1. this is a huge invasion of privacy.
2. if this was * I'd be all for it.

[lavenderdiva]

8. I do think this is an invasion of Charles' privacy...

and I am wondering how on earth these diaries came to be in the possession of the court, where the judge could decide on whether to release their contents? I read the article at your link, and it really didn't answer this question.

[1932]

12. You can't have your cake and tell people to eat it too.

In the article it said that he gave the diaries to a bunch of his friends, but didn't want them to go any farther.

It looks like the judge is accepting the defendant's argument that the prince's thoughts are an important matter for public discussion.

So, if the prince wants his privacy, it looks like he needs to abdicate. It seems like a fair tradeoff. If you're going to be the king, then people are entitled to know what you think about things so they can make a reasonable decision about whether they think monarchy is a good idea.

[1monster]

9. The release of the diary is outrageous on two fronts. First, the diary is

personal property. It doesn't belong to anyone except Charles. Second, the diary is intellectual property. The only person who has the right to offer it for publishing is Charles.

The article does not explain how the judge supported his ruling to release private intellectual property to people other than the owner. That is something I'd like to know.

[1932]

15. He gave the diary to his friends. Now he's embarrassed that his friends

gave it on to the press.

A guy who self-publishes a book can't complain if the people he gives it to give it to other people.

As for the copyright issue, the judge seems to believe that it's more important that people have a fully informed discussion about what the royal family thinks about things.

[hughee99]

16. This isn't really clear on that as far as I can see

"The prince’s lawyers say the document, intended for distribution to a few close friends, was leaked by a former palace employee"

Was the person who leaked this someone who Charles gave a copy of the writings to, or was it just someone who worked in the palace? IMHO, there's a HUGE difference here. If they were provided by someone who was given them by Charles, then it's his own damn fault that they got out to the press and excerpts are printed (though there are still copyright issues IMHO if they wish to print the whole works). If they were provided by someone who may have had access to them, but not authorization to read them, then they were stolen, and should not be published.

[1932]

11. A friend of mine overheard members of the British royal family at a resort

once.

"I wonder where crocodiles come from?"

Oh, lord.

Thank god for the end of empire.

[Nihil]

17. Ah

> A friend of mine overheard members of the British royal family at a
> resort once.

Nice to know that there is a reputable tabloid journalist posting on
this forum ...

:evilgrin:

[rfkrfk]

13. am I suppose to believe this crap? n/t

[thebigidea]

18. Apparently they violated the Dullness Act.

Unless there's some saucy chapter about batter-pudding hurling that hasn't been excerpted yet...