Premiership footballer sues twitter over super injunction

[Nutzer]

I heard that he's demanding Titter supply him with the names of the people publishing his name. Like he thinks Twitter are going to bother replying. It amused me when the judge gave him a "worldwide" super injunction. Did he really think the world's press were going to obey?
When they were handing out brains, he must have thought they said drains and said "no thanks".

[Im_Spartacus]

I can only think that Giggs is getting some fucking bad advice here.

Its absolutely clear that this is not about protecting his privacy and family, it is all about protecting an image, which coming up to retirement will be critical for him to get jobs in the media, and to be beamed into the nation's living rooms. The man has made millions from his squeaky clean reputation, and whilst I have a certain amount of sympathy for the right to privacy, if he is selling products based on an image, and that image turns out to be untrue, he should be reported on.

Not only have the legal team tried to force twitter to disclose the names of the account holders who have disclosed his name, they have also requested phone records including text message information from everyone who works for the sun newspaper.

Given that everyone in the country who can read knows that it is Giggs, I just feel the advice he is getting is adding insult to injury here, and if they just left the injunction as it was rather than keep coming back to fight people, eventually it would blow over and go away.

I just think his legal advisers are fleecing him and making him look increasingly ridiculous

[Dameerto]

I'm more inclined to think it's coming from him - aren't they more reliant on income from image rights down the road to keep the wage bill down for the club? (and ALLEGEDLY dodge taxes) - I get the feeling he is worried about a loss of earnings.

[john68]

There can only ever be one set of winners in these sort of cases and that the lawyers. The British lawyers will have one hell of a fight to assert the British court's judicial authority over a company based in the States. That's a lot of man hours and a lot in fees.
Remember that Twitter have been quite happy to take on the USA Government without flinching. They're not going to worry too much about a Prem footballer.
You can guarantee that it won't be on a no win no fee basis.

The same firm of lawyers, acting for Wayne Rooney attempted to stop the publication of a biography about him some time ago and lost. It was reported that they used bullying tactics and failed. They will get nowhere if they try to bully twitter.

[Im_Spartacus]

[Bear60]

Ryan Giggs Ryan Giggs is a fucking cunt
Ryan Giggs Ryan Giggs is a fucking cunt
He's a fucking cunt
He's a fucking cunt
Ryan Giggs
Ryan Giggs

love it haha

[Lev Bronstein]

I hardly took any interest at first. The I realised that the male in the affair was trying to keep his name out of the press and letting the female - the fragrant Imogen - face the full force of the tabloid gossip machine and I thought that was a bit cheap.

Silly me, the said Imogen is probably lapping up the publicity.

Then I thought, why the hell should Ryan bother with all the, very expensive, legal jiggery pokery (no pun intended). Who cares if he shags a beauty queen, it's between him, her his wife and a small number of others.

Of course, it's all down to money, to be exact image rights and a future career in the media - a suitable candidate for Channel Mogadon from what I've heard from him. The Club also has a financial stake in Mister Squeeky Clean's image.

Even so, expecting young men at the peak of their physical powers to keep it in their trousers is living in the Land of Make Believe.

Suddenly, this becomes important. The signings we make in the summer won't just be offered one wage, that for playing football. There'll be another one based on the players image rights. The club will probably pay extra so that they will have control of any income from that area. I guess most clubs will have the same sort of deal

Let's talk some numbers. I've no idea if the figures are correct, i'm just guessing. Let's say the wage bill is £100mill, let's also say the club get £20mill from using the players' image rights. Now on the occasion that the whole squad are photographed dressed like Barbie Dolls and engaging in group oral sex with a troop of baboons in front of a class of primary school kids then the image rights are suddenly worthless (or maybe not come to think of it). So £20mill disappears from the clubs income.

Bad enough as it is, a big hole would be blown in the club's efforts to conform to the Financial Fair Play rules.

Mad old world isn't it?

[feedthegreek]

type in the players name on wiki
and scroll right down and its there.
wiki as said its only reporting whats in the american press.

[Blue Toy]

[youtube]W9z4pTN0izY[/youtube]

[john68]

In fairness Lev, there is so much of all this shit going about and the public are well aware that it happens, does anyone really give a shit about it.
I think the issue is not that some half baked celeb has played away or some footballer has had an affair, it is that they can afford the super injunction to keep their name a secret.
The game now is to find out who it is and screw em by publicising it.

It also means that their illicit partners can be ripped apart apart by the media whilst they can afford to buy silence...or at least think they can.

[Nigels Tackle]

i don't the point of twitter... that said, being a big live music fan, I have managed to get some good info about gigs on there...

[Lev Bronstein]

Totally agree John, it's just that, as usual, there's more to this than meets the eye, and IMHO it involves money.

Perhaps it's because it's Sunday morning, but I find alot of this very sad.

I suppose that it's part of the deal of being a top professional footballer that in exchange for the riches involved they have to give over contol of their lives to others, that their personality becomes a commodity to be traded for profit. I'm not sure that that's healthy.

Mind you, I don't feel too sorry for those concerned. They should have enough brains to realise the situation they're in and act accordingly. Still, it would be nice to have the whole secrecy and injunction business blown out of the water.

[King Kev]

Can anybody work out who this is in the paper?

[Tokyo Blue]

Can anybody work out who this is in the paper?

Can you not give me a bit more to work with?

[john68]

Gillie ain't gonna be happy with you Lee...he does the quizzes on here...

Lev,
Apart from saving the rich celebs from public scrutiny, it also opens the door to more subversive stuff being kept from the public eye too.
Maybe a more serious point about this is the fact that the judiciary seem to be MAKING law (on the hoof), this being the job of the legislature, instead of merely APPLYING the law as given them by the government.

The part played by some small beer celebs, attempting to hold marriages together or protecting image rights and potential earnings is not really that important. The footballer seems to have been badly advised and is being used as pawn in a much bigger issue.

It reminds me of the Peter Wright "Spycatcher" book thing that was banned in the UK. It created a lot of publicity, made the government look idiots and was still largely on open sale, round the World and over here too.
PEOPLE RULE OK!!!!

[Dameerto]

Wow that image on the front of that news paper has a striking similarity to RYAN GIGGS, hasn't it? I wonder if that means RYAN GIGGS has been having an affair with Imogen Thomas? If so, RYAN GIGGS must be rather concerned over a potential leak with an alleged 'super injunction' and the effect it could have on his 'off-field' earnings potential.

[Beefymcfc]

Are Wiki allowed to report this:

Extract From Wikipedia page - 22 May 11:

Gagging order

See also: 2011 British super-injunction controversy

In May 2011, it was reported in non-UK media sources that Giggs was the identity of CTB in CTB v News Group Newspapers,[77] a footballer who had applied for and obtained an anonymised gagging order in relation to an alleged extra-marital affair with model Imogen Thomas. Giggs had subsequently sued the social networking site Twitter after his identity was revealed by a user who had revealed the identities of other individuals that had taken out so-called "superinjunctions".[78] A blogger for Forbes magazine remarked "Giggs has not heard of the Streisand effect", observing that mentions of his name had significantly increased after the case against Twitter had been reported in the news.[79]

;-)

[Dameerto]

All speculation certainly does seem to point to it being RYAN GIGGS then, I wonder if we should start calling him HASH-TAG GIGGS.

[Dameerto]

Apparently, within the last hour, an MP has named RYAN GIGGS in Parliament as the footballer who's been playing away and shagging some fame-hungry strumpet.

[HeyMark]

If I was tankin Imogen I'd be telling everybody, not trying to stop them from finding out