This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/entertainment/6614301.stm
The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| OK! wins Zeta Jones photo battle | OK! wins Zeta Jones photo battle |
| (10 minutes later) | |
| Law Lords have ruled in favour of OK! magazine in the confidentiality battle over Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones's wedding photos. | Law Lords have ruled in favour of OK! magazine in the confidentiality battle over Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones's wedding photos. |
| Rival magazine Hello! published shots of the couple's wedding in 2000, despite the rights being owned by OK!. | Rival magazine Hello! published shots of the couple's wedding in 2000, despite the rights being owned by OK!. |
| But the Lords disagreed with OK!'s claim that by publishing paparazzi shots of the event, Hello! was damaging its business. | But the Lords disagreed with OK!'s claim that by publishing paparazzi shots of the event, Hello! was damaging its business. |
| The couple sold the rights to their wedding to OK! for £1m. | The couple sold the rights to their wedding to OK! for £1m. |
| 'Spoiler' pictures | |
| It was agreed the publication would get exclusive coverage of their wedding celebrations at the Plaza Hotel in New York on 18 November 2000. OK! took legal action after Hello! published the "spoiler" pictures. | |
| Three years later a judge awarded damages of £1,033,156 to OK! after it was decided the unofficial publication had caused commercial damage. | |
| But Hello!, which admitted it had used the snatched photos to spoil its rival's exclusive coverage, successfully challenged the order in the Appeal Court in May 2005, arguing that "spoilers" were a well-known tactic in the newspaper and magazine industry. | |
| Zeta Jones and Douglas originally claimed for "personal distress" | |
| Lord Philips upheld Hello!'s appeal, ruling that its publication of the photographs had not breached OK!'s commercial rights. OK! was ordered to pay back damages, costs and interest amounting to nearly £2m. | |
| Intrusion | |
| Richard Millett QC, representing OK!, told a panel of five Law Lords last November how it had been previously established at the High Court that the exclusive was an "extremely valuable" asset to the magazine. | |
| He said Ms Zeta Jones and Mr Douglas - who are no longer involved in the case - were interested in the deal with OK! as a means of preserving confidentiality, rather than to make money. | |
| During the hearing, Hello! argued that any confidentiality ceased after OK! published the photographs. | |
| After the original 2003 hearing, the Hollywood couple were awarded £14,600 after Ms Zeta Jones told the court she felt "devastated" and "violated" when she discovered "unflattering" paparazzi pictures had been taken. |