Harry & Meghan 16

[Jackie3]

Yes, of course they had releases signed. Did you want them to film children without parental consent?

However, they did not ask 7-year olds to sign the releases. That was tabloid invention.

12 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

I would not sign this if it was my child going to this school. They would be indisposed that day.

 

Plenty of parents would sign, so I don't think it would matter if your kid wasn't there. 

As you can see, they got parental consent from lots of parents.

 

The real problem is when people film or post pictures of kids WITHOUT asking the parents. That is wrong.

[prayawaythefundie]

Never ever would I sign that but I think it wouldn’t be legal here anyway.

[GreenBeans]

12 minutes ago, prayawaythefundie said:

Never ever would I sign that but I think it wouldn’t be legal here anyway.

Yep, no way to both.

This goes well beyond any “usual” waiver (e.g. photos or videos of the child could be published in news coverage of the event with the child visible as part of the crowd but without identifying the child).

[Jackie3]

10 hours ago, GreenBeans said:

Yep, no way to both.

This goes well beyond any “usual” waiver (e.g. photos or videos of the child could be published in news coverage of the event with the child visible as part of the crowd but without identifying the child).

Really? How do you know? Have you seen other release forms for celebrity visits? 

This is totally different from the release you sign when someone films your child's gym class, for release on the school webpage. Did you think the release would be the same for a celebrity visit? It's not.

Edited September 30, 2023 by Jackie3

[GreenBeans]

On 9/30/2023 at 7:41 AM, Jackie3 said:

Really? How do you know? Have you seen other release forms for celebrity visits? 

This is totally different from the release you sign when someone films your child's gym class, for release on the school webpage. Did you think the release would be the same for a celebrity visit? It's not.

Well, but it should be exactly the same if children (or rather, their parents) haven’t sought out and signed up for the celebrity visit, but are being targeted at their school.

If you want material to use for promos and whatever other commercial projects under such strict terms, fine, just do a book reading for children whose parents specifically signed them up for it at these terms, just like you would book kids for a tv ad a tv series.

Also, for a matter of fact, I happen to be a lawyer specializing in contracts law, so I do have some understanding of how contracts are and can be drafted, and what clauses actually mean, and there’s no way I’d sign something like that for my child.

[AmazonGrace]

Most celebrities are people with about an average size brain, so if perfectly ordinary people filming your kid at the gym can tell you what they're going to be using the footage for, no reason celebrities couldn't do the same.

[DalmatianCat]

On 9/29/2023 at 1:19 PM, AmazonGrace said:

 

They were asked to promise not to sue if participation in the project caused their child to be harmed somehow.

 

Considering how much Harry has claimed to be harmed by the press as a child/teen/young adult and how quick he is to sue as an adult, that section about not suing is rich. Does he not care about other children being exploited like he was? Does anyone on his PR team ever do an irony check?

[WatchingTheTireFireBurn]

ew gross. His own children aren't used for promotion - but other people's can be.

They need to just stop

[noseybutt]

The best way to spread a story is to insist that children not talk about it. 😂

[Jackie3]

21 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

Most celebrities are people with about an average size brain, so if perfectly ordinary people filming your kid at the gym can tell you what they're going to be using the footage for, no reason celebrities couldn't do the same.

Those school release forms are written by the lawyers hired by the school board, then approved by the school. Generally, the same form is used for years. Updating these forms cost money, since the law firm bills the school board for its work. 

Do you really think the WWE lawyers craft the same type of document? That a high-powered entertainment lawyer is concerned about the same thing as a school board? That Meghan and Harry's interests are the same as the local magician who comes to entertain the kids?

Has anyone seen the releases the BRF requires? I doubt it, since the BRF has opted out of all Freedom of Information Acts. But I am sure it is quite different than the release created by the Devonshire school board for the village schools.

I mean, what are you arguing here? That MM has such outrageous demands that she forces WWE to craft an extra-demanding release form, and WWE agrees to do so? Because she is such a bad person? It's pretty sad to get so invested in making this "point."

Edited October 2, 2023 by Jackie3

[AmazonGrace]

Look, if the BRF or some Hollywood celebrity lawyer hotshot  comes to me and asks me to sign a release form that allows them to use my child for whichever form of promotion they can think of, dubbing the video whichever way they like, sell my kid¨s footage to unknown people for unknown purposes, make my kids a meme in some future form of media that haven't been invented yet...

yeah, it's also a nope from me.

All of this for free, and asking me not to sue if my child is harmed by any of this.

 

Edit:

The point I am making is, I am not going to knowingly grant anybody the rights to do whatever the hell they like with my children's video, voice or biographical information.

I have said nothing about anybody being a bad person because it doesn't really matter at all if  Meghan or anybody else  asking for this is a bad person or not.  Because the producers are given the to sell the rights to their video archives to who-ever-the-hell might want it, to do whatever they want with.  Meghan won't be able to vouch for the characters of all of those people. What with the AI nowadays, there's no telling where your kid's face might end up on.

Edited October 4, 2023 by AmazonGrace

[SoSoNosy]

Back in the infancy of the internet, I knew a woman who loved posting pictures of her two cute little girls on chat boards like this one.  Suddenly all the pictures disappeared, but it was too late; the girls' pictures had shown up on a porn site in Russia.   There were supposedly international legal proceedings, etc, I never found out what actually happened.  The family basically disappeared off the internet, though.

[viii]

That sort of behaviour is unfortunately still happening. I see so many creators on tik tok who post videos of them changing diapers or babies and little girls in bathing suits and the video will have over 10k saves. Makes me sick. 

[Jackie3]

3 hours ago, SoSoNosy said:

Back in the infancy of the internet, I knew a woman who loved posting pictures of her two cute little girls on chat boards like this one.  Suddenly all the pictures disappeared, but it was too late; the girls' pictures had shown up on a porn site in Russia.   There were supposedly international legal proceedings, etc, I never found out what actually happened.  The family basically disappeared off the internet, though.

Someone should tell the British royal family. They pose with children all the time.

And there's tons of footage of the royal children out there. Plus footage of commoners kids.

Edited October 5, 2023 by Jackie3

[Jackie3]

Harry was denied police protection when he's in the UK. He offered to pay for it, but he was still refused. Apparently the police are not bodyguards for celebrities and actors.

Why, then, is the police providing protection to celebrity Holly Willoughby? She had a kidnapping threat made against here, and now has police protection in the UK. Since Meghan had many death threats, you'd think she'd qualify too.

It's almost like the police were following the Palace's orders.

[just_ordinary]

On 10/5/2023 at 4:11 AM, viii said:

That sort of behaviour is unfortunately still happening. I see so many creators on tik tok who post videos of them changing diapers or babies and little girls in bathing suits and the video will have over 10k saves. Makes me sick. 

The sad thing is- they don’t need to be naked or in a less covered up state. Any pretty picture will do. That’s very disturbing in my opinion.

I would never post my children anywhere. What’sApp is as unsafe as I am willing to go and I do really think twice about what pictures I send to other people and to whom. 
I value the option of having no media presence. I am sure they will probably post on their own at one point. Hopefully at an age where they can have some understanding of the consequences. 
I don’t think children will get bullied over some potty training pictures. That’s far to normal nowadays. And of course some creep can always snap a picture of them somewhere. But I refuse to make it easy for others. 
We have a Late Night Show that made a few segments where they confronted people from the audience with how easy it was to infiltrate their life with what they post. Ringing the door while they where on holiday. Discord download files. Getting them food delivered. Talking to them after finding out where they are….

It was all very funny and obviously harmless (even though the file „Goth girl wants me to oil her up and…..“ would have made me die of shame. He took it in stride though) but it’s very eye opening. I am sure people could find out some very accurate things about my circumstances just by going through my posts here.

[Seeking]

The things instagram can discern about someone based upon posts and what is watched is very concerning - even with privacy settings. Less social media activity is definitely more

[Jackie3]

The Sussexes decision to keep their kids off social media is a wise one, sounds like

[tabitha2]

Our children are sacrosanct that even seeing their faces is an invasion of their deeply!  treasured! Privacy!  And will evidently scar  them for life because of the Evul!! Press 

 

Other people kids? Meh. Let’s potentially use their images as we see fit and try to make sure the parents are powerless to stop us.  
 

I’ll take “What are things  that make people really disgusted by them?” for a  1000 ,Alex! 

[Jackie3]

43 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

Our children are sacrosanct that even seeing their faces is an invasion of their deeply!  treasured! Privacy!  And will evidently scar  them for life because of the Evul!! Press 

 

Other people kids? Meh. Let’s potentially use their images as we see fit and try to make sure the parents are powerless to stop us.  
 

I’ll take “What are things  that make people really disgusted by them?” for a  1000 ,Alex! 

Well, I think asking parents for permission is great. Respectful, too, Each parent can decide for their own kid. Do the royals do this when they meet kids in foreign countries? I sure hope so. Because I see them filmed with kids a lot.

There are podcasters who have said little Archie shouldn’t be allowed to live. Or should be dangled over the balcony. I’ve seen people speculating that little Lilli will grow u to be a stripper. So I’m glad Harry and Meghan are keeping them safe. Aren’t you?

If there were children in that Harlem school who receive the same sort of negative media attention,  then I imagine their parents declined to have them filmed. But I’m not sure many of them have been subjected t the same kind of hate. It’s kind of like the hate your post exhibits. I’d sure want to protect my kid from that!

[Jackie3]

This is really nice. Sir Simon Wessely is the President of the Royal College of Psychiatrist, and he had nothing but praise for Prince Harry's work in mental health.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5519097/

This noted psychiatrist did not call Harry a whiner or tell him that it was "long ago" and that he "should get over it." He did not compare Harry's coping with William's and say that William had grieved better. He did not urge him to stop talking about his mum's death.

This was back in 2017, but it's particularly relevant with Archewell's summit on mental health is week. No wonder tickets for this summit sold out almost immediately. 

 

Edited October 8, 2023 by Jackie3

[prayawaythefundie]

@Jackie3 Heads Together wasn‘t originally Harry‘s idea though. I‘ll let you guess who came up with it. 😉

[VGL]

Archewell is not hosting the summit.  H&M are participating in a panel.

[louisa05]

On 10/4/2023 at 9:11 PM, viii said:

That sort of behaviour is unfortunately still happening. I see so many creators on tik tok who post videos of them changing diapers or babies and little girls in bathing suits and the video will have over 10k saves. Makes me sick. 

Kind of like putting a video of your child in the bathtub in a Netflix documentary? 

[viii]

2 hours ago, louisa05 said:

Kind of like putting a video of your child in the bathtub in a Netflix documentary? 

I’ll take your word for it. I never watched their documentary. Boring. But yes - NOBODY should be airing pictures or videos of their children in a bathtub. Disgusting.