big-will 7 Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 Don't know how this is playing outside of the UK, but there's a massive story about superinjunctions - basically gagging orders that peoplenwith the cash to do so can get to prevent details of scandal coming out. Problem is, people are posting stuff on t'inta and twitter and the like, leaving the internet awash withnthegoss but the papers and legit media only able to write silly vague stuff. The footie legend in this latest one is apparently suing twitter, which isnonly creating more of a backlash. Lots of interesting issues here though. Quote: A Premier League footballer who tried to gag Twitter from disclosing details of his adulterous private life saw his attempt backfire yesterday. Millions of speculative comments were posted on the site, and a guest on a BBC radio programme appeared to accidentally identify the footballer who has already won a gagging order. The married sportsman had won a superinjunction to stop Imogen Thomas, a former Big Brother contestant, and The Sun newspaper from publishing details of his affair. The footballer then obtained a High Court order asking Twitter to reveal details of users who had allegedly used the site to breach the superinjunction. Twitter users reacted furiously to the legal action — the first taken against the microblogging website — with millions of comments. It prompted an avalanche of online publicity and speculation about the sportsman’s identity. Today, BBC Radio 4’s flagship current affairs programme, seemed accidentally to identify the footballer when a guest blurted out his first name during an interview. While the BBC sought to play down the affair, the comments were picked up and broadcast all over the internet — including tweets by at least two of the corporation’s own journalists. Dominic Grieve, the Attorney-General, said he would review comments made about the player on Today. Yesterday several BBC journalists appeared to mention a sportsman’s name on Twitter, and publishers in America identified him. The player is taking action against the social networking site and the “persons unknown†who purportedly revealed his name last month after it emerged that he had obtained the court order. Legal experts say the legal action against Twitter appeared doomed to failure because the High Court in London has no jurisdiction in California, where the site is based. Twitter has not commented about the action. American newspapers have also published the footballer’s name. The original order, in which the player is referred to only as CTB, blocked the publication by The Sun — which is a subsidiary of News International, parent company of The Times — of an alleged “sexual relationship†with Ms Thomas. Schillings, the law firm representing CTB, said: “An application has been made to obtain limited information concerning the unlawful use of Twitter by a small number of individuals who may have breached a court order.†The “persons unknown†are described in the documents lodged at the High Court in London as those “responsible for the publication of information on the Twitter accountsâ€. Mark Stephens, a media lawyer, said the BBC incident suggested the dam was finally about to burst over injunctions. While the player could potentially sue the “persons unknownâ€, he was unlikely to be able to take the same action against Twitter because the company does not fall within British jurisdiction, he said. Mr Stephens said: “If you want to sue Twitter, you have to go to San Francisco. Any attempt to enforce English privacy or libel law will not be accepted in the USA.†Max Clifford, the PR expert, said: “Superinjunctions and injunctions are purely a law for the rich, and purely there to protect the rich. What you need is some halfway house between the invading of people’s privacy and freedom of the press and information, both of which are vital in a democracy.†The row over superinjunctions is also generating tensions between judges and Parliament. A High Court judge last week relaxed an injunction relating to Sir Fred Goodwin, the former boss of Royal Bank of Scotland, after a peer appeared to break the order by revealing details of Mr Goodwin’s alleged sexual relationship with a senior colleague. Mr Goodwin’s attempt to conceal the alleged affair is seen by many MPs and peers as an example of how the courts have gone too far in granting superinjunctions. Further clashes between Parliament and judges may erupt this week if a Liberal Democrat breaks another secrecy injunction in the Commons. John Hemming, MP for Birmingham Yardley, said: “I intend revealing more details of an injunction, but the injunction relates to poison water, not footballers’ affairs.†Lord Judge, the Lord Chief Justice, last week castigated parliamentarians for revealing banned information Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 who was it? vaguely remember Lineker alluding to this story on MOTD Link to post Share on other sites
brit-gob 9 Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 Can't say as Snow japan might get sued or something! But here's the Sunday Herald from yesterday. Link to post Share on other sites
grungy-gonads 54 Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 He's made it ever so much more bad than it was. I'm sure with hindsight he's just wishing he had admitted he had shagged someone, publically apologised to his family and be all contrite etc. Now he's just tarnishing his Legend status. Just a bit. Silly boy. Still a legend. Link to post Share on other sites
pie-eater 207 Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 It's all getting very silly isn't it. Here's the latest silliness I just read: Quote: The case of the footballer and the model has thrown up the bizarre and sinister prospect of a famous person being secretly sent to prison for breaking a privacy injunction. The unprecedented scenario emerged yesterday when it was revealed that a television personality faces a possible jail sentence for repeating the footballer’s name in a series of Twitter entries and making jokes at his expense. If the media figure is named in any trial for contempt of court then the footballer’s injunction will be effectively broken. So if judges are to keep to the terms of the injunction the trial is meant to protect, he cannot be named. Link to post Share on other sites
NoFakie 45 Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 Did he expect a woman off Big Brother (i.e., Attention Seeker of the Year) with an online sex tape to be discrete? What a plank!!! Link to post Share on other sites
big-will 7 Posted May 24, 2011 Author Share Posted May 24, 2011 He probably didn't think when he was on the verge of getting it! Link to post Share on other sites
scouser 4 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 The suing twitter thing is almost as silly. Bad advice. Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 we all know which part of his body was in control......it wasn't his brain. Link to post Share on other sites
soubriquet 0 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 What celebrities do in the bedroom is of zero interest to me. For superinjunction read Christopher Booker in the Torygraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/colum...al-workers.html Civil serpents using state power to interfere in peoples lives, no accountability. Pure State Control. Link to post Share on other sites
soubriquet 0 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 AhHa. Married footballer gets his legover! According the the Torygraph, the DirtyRottenBounder is no less than Ryan Giggs. I'm shocked. Probably the most important news since the start of WWII, if not worse. Link to post Share on other sites
pie-eater 207 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 Good headline this Link to post Share on other sites
grungy-gonads 54 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 Still a Legend. Kind of dissapointing that this silly business will tarnish his otherwise exemplary record and the timing is not good, but... Link to post Share on other sites
grungy-gonads 54 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 Apparently this Imogen tarts list includes Danny Simpson, Ronaldo, Defoe as well as Giggsy. Link to post Share on other sites
best skier in hakuba 5 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 Originally Posted By: soubriquet What celebrities do in the bedroom is of zero interest to me. What you are personally interested in, or not, is of zero consequence in the matter. Link to post Share on other sites
stemik 14 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 Originally Posted By: grungy-gonads Apparently this Imogen tarts list includes Danny Simpson, Ronaldo, Defoe as well as Giggsy. She's a tart he's a legend Link to post Share on other sites
grungy-gonads 54 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 He's a silly boy for doing this. But he's a legend because of this: Giggs: Major Honours 12 League titles 4 Fa cups 4 League cups 2 CLs 1 Super Cup 1 Intercontinental cup 1 CWC Total: 25 (not counting Charity Shields) - You knew that anyway, so stop being a dick. Link to post Share on other sites
Mantas 3 Posted May 24, 2011 Share Posted May 24, 2011 Never heard of him. Are there any serious newspapers in the UK? Link to post Share on other sites
BagOfCrisps 24 Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 If you don't like footie, you wouldn't have heard of him would you now? Link to post Share on other sites
ShinyDiscoBall 2 Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Giggs is a rare football player indeed. Many people, even those who have no time for football and even even those fans of other teams, have admired him for how he has conducted himself for the past 20 years or so. His success in the game is (almost?) unparallelled and his loyalty to his team unheard of in the modern game. I don't care what people get up to, it is a shame that this silly adventure will taint his image. Anyway this superinjunction thing isn't just about football players.... Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts