It's now been independently verified that Rihanna has returned to her home in Los Angeles. There is also some speculation that she will soon move onto her native Barbados. I don't have any problem with that at all provided that any change in location is declared and verified. That is because while it is quite easy for people with the technical know how to track Rihanna's movements the operation in Mali involves co-ordinating a vast number of people from multiple nations many of whom can't even read.
Although Rihanna is currently in the US she has today had some good news from the UK with a High Court Judge upholding her complaint against the High Street retail chain "Topshop" over their sale of T-shirts bearing her image. Although I've yet to read the judgement I understand that the Court ruled that the rights to the image were owned by the photographer who lawfully sold them to Topshop. However Topshop's decision to sell the T-shirts bearing the images as "Rihanna Tank-Tops" violated Rihanna's protected brand name making the product an unlawful attempt to pass the product off as one endorsed by Rihanna. As Topshop immediately stopped using the phrase "Rihanna Tank-Tops" after being told to cease and desist this ruling against Topshop seems a little harsh. It also seems like an attempt to drive a wedge between Rihanna and Topshop and force her deeper into the clutches of that problematic other high street retail chain "River Island."
What I'm finding amusing is that the Rihanna ruling comes on a very busy day for the UK's High Court. Also this morning a law firm has been ordered to make a large donation to a soldiers charity after breaching the privacy of "Harry Potter" author J.K Rowling by revealing she had written a crime novel under a pen name. This along with the Rihanna verdict seems like the UK trying to nudge me towards using Rihanna's London law firm for this criminal damage matter. I'm not even aware of who the law firm in question is but I suspect they specialise in corporate and contract law rather then the range of criminal defence and medical malpractice issues I require. Also with Rihanna's business with the firm now complete there's no incentive for me to use them especially as I am highly suspicious of anyone associated with Rihanna's management. The announcement by the Parliamentary Home Affairs select committee that I believe 22 law firms are among those implicated in a phone hacking scandal also seems to be a suggestion that I consider contacting the law firms involved in the News of the World/News International phone hacking scandal.
I though am still not convinced that I require legal representation. Today's ruling by the High Court over the right to die cases underline that it is still most certainly unlawful for a doctor to deliberately kill a patient and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have been instructed to review the guidelines for prosecution. As in my case there is less then 1% chance of conviction I'm confused as to why the matter would proceed to trial.
12:00 on 31/7/13.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment