Harry & Meghan #326 Fighting for journalistic integrity, my arse

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Sorry to be a pain but the Orlando sentinel isn’t available in the UK is there a way to copy the content? I’m very confused by the whole thing 🤣
No worries, @Maleficent50 I got you! I hope this helps!

BREAKING NEWSRoyal clause and King Charles III invoked in Disney vs. DeSantis board dispute
By Jeff Weiner
Orlando Sentinel

Mar 30, 2023 at 9:57 am


As the news broke that Walt Disney Co. had quietly stripped power from the board that oversees Disney World’s government services ahead of its takeover by Gov. Ron DeSantis’ replacements, a reference to British royalty caught the internet’s attention, becoming instant fodder for memes.
A “declaration of restrictive covenants” approved by the board’s former members on Feb. 8 — a day before the Florida House voted to hand control of the district to DeSantis — prohibits the district from using Disney’s name, Mickey Mouse and other characters without the corporation’s approval.


But it was the term of that ban that raised eyebrows.
“[T]his Declaration shall continue in effect until twenty one (21) years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration,” the document said.

The mention of the king in a list of covenants dealing with Cinderella’s castle, rather than Buckingham Palace, struck many as odd, if not hilarious.
Some speculated the inclusion was a dig at DeSantis, who has said his goal in removing Disney’s control of the former Reedy Creek Improvement District was “ending the Corporate Kingdom.”

However, there’s a more straightforward explanation, rooted in longstanding legal traditions and a common law concept known as the “rule against perpetuities.”
As explained by Cornell Law School, the rule holds that “no interest in land is good unless it must vest, if at all, not later than twenty-one years after some life in being at the creation of the interest.”
In other words, covenants must be tied to the lifespan of a person living at the time the covenant is signed, plus 21 years.
Disney agreements by Skyler Swisher on Scribd
This rule gave rise to what’s known as the “Royal lives clause” — this is where King Charles III gets dragged into the Disney vs. DeSantis dispute — which is meant to extend a covenant as long as possible by tying it to the lineage of a member of a royal family.
According to the U.K. law firm Birketts, royals came to be used in such clauses because, given their wealth, they tended to live longer than most and their family trees were relatively easy to map.
And the current royal family bears that out: King Charles III’s mother, Queen Elizabeth II, was Britain’s longest-serving monarch, dying last September at the ripe age of 96. His father, Prince Philip, died in 2021 just two months before his 100th birthday. And his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth — also known as the Queen Mother — lived to see 101 years.
The clause addresses King Charles III’s living descendants at the time of the agreement, which not only includes his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, but their children: Prince George, 9; Princess Charlotte, 7; Prince Louis, 4; Prince Archie, 3; and Princess Lilibet, 1.

The hashtag #longlivelilibet is one of the trending topics.
But not everyone uses the British monarchy. In fact, many in the U.S. over the years have tied covenants to American political dynasties, like the Kennedys.
As the memes died down late Wednesday, the internet began to catch on. By Thursday morning, “Rule Against Perpetuities” was trending on Twitter.
Meanwhile, the new board members for the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, as the former Reedy Creek district is now known, are gearing up for a legal fight to challenge the covenants enacted by their predecessors.
Said Chairman Martin Garcia: “What it looks like to me [is that] because Disney has the Magic Kingdom, they thought they could be king for a day.”
READ MORE ABOUT DISNEY VS. DESANTIS
Kristyn Wellesley of the Sentinel staff contributed.
[email protected]
---
 
  • Like
Reactions: 21
me neither, i was just making fun of disney and their track record of suing every one over copyright infringement.
Is this why she's been rumoured to have been in Florida? - has she got wind of possible moves towards 'slimming down' & removal of titles from non-working Royals and is seeking recognition & use of 'Princess Lilibet of Sussex' title in perpetuity somehow????
 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Haha
Reactions: 21
Well in case he does here's mine"

duck off you traitorous,twatting,tosser and take your deceitful,delusional,demented,dimwitted,distorted,disloyal,depraved doppelganger dildos with you.

From the Judge:

duck orf you crazy,cretinous,carping bleep, your legal bill is in the post!!I

No cigar bleep!
I hope the Judge is a tattler and quotes your words Nana!
 
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 28
No worries, @Maleficent50 I got you! I hope this helps!

BREAKING NEWSRoyal clause and King Charles III invoked in Disney vs. DeSantis board dispute
By Jeff Weiner
Orlando Sentinel

Mar 30, 2023 at 9:57 am


As the news broke that Walt Disney Co. had quietly stripped power from the board that oversees Disney World’s government services ahead of its takeover by Gov. Ron DeSantis’ replacements, a reference to British royalty caught the internet’s attention, becoming instant fodder for memes.
A “declaration of restrictive covenants” approved by the board’s former members on Feb. 8 — a day before the Florida House voted to hand control of the district to DeSantis — prohibits the district from using Disney’s name, Mickey Mouse and other characters without the corporation’s approval.


But it was the term of that ban that raised eyebrows.
“[T]his Declaration shall continue in effect until twenty one (21) years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration,” the document said.

The mention of the king in a list of covenants dealing with Cinderella’s castle, rather than Buckingham Palace, struck many as odd, if not hilarious.
Some speculated the inclusion was a dig at DeSantis, who has said his goal in removing Disney’s control of the former Reedy Creek Improvement District was “ending the Corporate Kingdom.”

However, there’s a more straightforward explanation, rooted in longstanding legal traditions and a common law concept known as the “rule against perpetuities.”
As explained by Cornell Law School, the rule holds that “no interest in land is good unless it must vest, if at all, not later than twenty-one years after some life in being at the creation of the interest.”
In other words, covenants must be tied to the lifespan of a person living at the time the covenant is signed, plus 21 years.
Disney agreements by Skyler Swisher on Scribd
This rule gave rise to what’s known as the “Royal lives clause” — this is where King Charles III gets dragged into the Disney vs. DeSantis dispute — which is meant to extend a covenant as long as possible by tying it to the lineage of a member of a royal family.
According to the U.K. law firm Birketts, royals came to be used in such clauses because, given their wealth, they tended to live longer than most and their family trees were relatively easy to map.
And the current royal family bears that out: King Charles III’s mother, Queen Elizabeth II, was Britain’s longest-serving monarch, dying last September at the ripe age of 96. His father, Prince Philip, died in 2021 just two months before his 100th birthday. And his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth — also known as the Queen Mother — lived to see 101 years.
The clause addresses King Charles III’s living descendants at the time of the agreement, which not only includes his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, but their children: Prince George, 9; Princess Charlotte, 7; Prince Louis, 4; Prince Archie, 3; and Princess Lilibet, 1.

The hashtag #longlivelilibet is one of the trending topics.
But not everyone uses the British monarchy. In fact, many in the U.S. over the years have tied covenants to American political dynasties, like the Kennedys.
As the memes died down late Wednesday, the internet began to catch on. By Thursday morning, “Rule Against Perpetuities” was trending on Twitter.
Meanwhile, the new board members for the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, as the former Reedy Creek district is now known, are gearing up for a legal fight to challenge the covenants enacted by their predecessors.
Said Chairman Martin Garcia: “What it looks like to me [is that] because Disney has the Magic Kingdom, they thought they could be king for a day.”
READ MORE ABOUT DISNEY VS. DESANTIS
Kristyn Wellesley of the Sentinel staff contributed.
[email protected]
---
Thank you @whoseyerdaddy 😊
 
  • Like
Reactions: 19
Thanks for the new thread and title. :)

Is that Disney thing for real?

If so, why is Disney invoking a foreign Monarch in a legal document anyway? Seeing as Florida was colonised first by the Spanish, wouldn't King Felipe be more appropriate?

And do Disney realise we haven't had a "King of England" since 1707, when it became known as the Kingdom of Great Britain under Queen Anne?

Their grasp of British history appears to be about as good as Harold's.

Is Smeg pitching a "Princess Lili, Heiress To The Throne Of England" movie to them, or something?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Sick
Reactions: 37
Interesting that he has turned up for the last few hours of the hearing when he didn't attend the hearing yesterday. It definitely raises the following question Why wasn't he at the hearing yesterday?
I saw him in Boots. He was buying Elizabeth Arden cream and a meal deal.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 47
Just curious, do you think they just have a platonic business arrangement

Ben Affleck is freaking me out. I keep blinking and squinting my eyes.
Did he have an accident when he was younger and his face has slowly become unable to move.
Affleck looks like he has frozen from his cheeks to above his eyes.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Heart
Reactions: 20
H G Tudor suggests that Haz coming to UK is simply a test run ordered by Smeg to guage public reaction ahead of the Coronation. He made the point that she sees Haz as an extension of herself, a lieutenant, but she doesn't consider the possibility that she is more hated and might provoke a more hostile reaction.

 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Sick
Reactions: 34
No worries, @Maleficent50 I got you! I hope this helps!

BREAKING NEWSRoyal clause and King Charles III invoked in Disney vs. DeSantis board dispute
By Jeff Weiner
Orlando Sentinel

Mar 30, 2023 at 9:57 am


As the news broke that Walt Disney Co. had quietly stripped power from the board that oversees Disney World’s government services ahead of its takeover by Gov. Ron DeSantis’ replacements, a reference to British royalty caught the internet’s attention, becoming instant fodder for memes.
A “declaration of restrictive covenants” approved by the board’s former members on Feb. 8 — a day before the Florida House voted to hand control of the district to DeSantis — prohibits the district from using Disney’s name, Mickey Mouse and other characters without the corporation’s approval.


But it was the term of that ban that raised eyebrows.
“[T]his Declaration shall continue in effect until twenty one (21) years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration,” the document said.

The mention of the king in a list of covenants dealing with Cinderella’s castle, rather than Buckingham Palace, struck many as odd, if not hilarious.
Some speculated the inclusion was a dig at DeSantis, who has said his goal in removing Disney’s control of the former Reedy Creek Improvement District was “ending the Corporate Kingdom.”

However, there’s a more straightforward explanation, rooted in longstanding legal traditions and a common law concept known as the “rule against perpetuities.”
As explained by Cornell Law School, the rule holds that “no interest in land is good unless it must vest, if at all, not later than twenty-one years after some life in being at the creation of the interest.”
In other words, covenants must be tied to the lifespan of a person living at the time the covenant is signed, plus 21 years.
Disney agreements by Skyler Swisher on Scribd
This rule gave rise to what’s known as the “Royal lives clause” — this is where King Charles III gets dragged into the Disney vs. DeSantis dispute — which is meant to extend a covenant as long as possible by tying it to the lineage of a member of a royal family.
According to the U.K. law firm Birketts, royals came to be used in such clauses because, given their wealth, they tended to live longer than most and their family trees were relatively easy to map.
And the current royal family bears that out: King Charles III’s mother, Queen Elizabeth II, was Britain’s longest-serving monarch, dying last September at the ripe age of 96. His father, Prince Philip, died in 2021 just two months before his 100th birthday. And his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth — also known as the Queen Mother — lived to see 101 years.
The clause addresses King Charles III’s living descendants at the time of the agreement, which not only includes his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, but their children: Prince George, 9; Princess Charlotte, 7; Prince Louis, 4; Prince Archie, 3; and Princess Lilibet, 1.

The hashtag #longlivelilibet is one of the trending topics.
But not everyone uses the British monarchy. In fact, many in the U.S. over the years have tied covenants to American political dynasties, like the Kennedys.
As the memes died down late Wednesday, the internet began to catch on. By Thursday morning, “Rule Against Perpetuities” was trending on Twitter.
Meanwhile, the new board members for the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, as the former Reedy Creek district is now known, are gearing up for a legal fight to challenge the covenants enacted by their predecessors.
Said Chairman Martin Garcia: “What it looks like to me [is that] because Disney has the Magic Kingdom, they thought they could be king for a day.”
READ MORE ABOUT DISNEY VS. DESANTIS
Kristyn Wellesley of the Sentinel staff contributed.
[email protected]
---
That's all very well but the Princess of Monteshitshow doesn't exist, a mere figment of the thunderc*nts imagination
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Heart
Reactions: 31
Oh, FFS... :rolleyes: These stoopid sugarz are as dumb as a box of bleeping hammers...
How old or valid is that declaration?
Charles only inherited the throne last year, and for all anyone knew he was going to choose a totally different name as King to Charles? He could have been King David 1st? or used any other of his names!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 22
This is WICKED premature, but I thought it was worth putting out there regardless!
Harry and Meghan #327 Mister nine times got hacked, but his case still got sacked!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 29
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.