Unauthorized Madonna wedding photos will cost British tabloid Mail On Sunday a pretty penny. A London High Court agreed the tabloid violated Madonna’s rights when it ran exclusive photographs copied by interior designer Robert Joseph Wilber without authorization.
The lawsuit claimed approximately $7.5M in damages. Judge David Eady ordered judgment in an amount to be determined next year. A Mail on Sunday spokesman who did not want to be identified placed a far lower value on the photographs.
Their commercial value today is indicated by the very modest sum we and other publications paid for them. The figure suggested by Madonna's lawyers is simply fantasy.
According to Madonna’s almost as famous publicist Liz Rosenberg, the celebrity pop star will donate any monetary award to her Raising Malawi foundation.
And the beat goes on.
In related news, OK! Magazine recently published several of the offending photographs in an article about the Madonna and Guy Ritchie divorce. Last week, OK! ran a huge apology and disclaimer saying it had no idea the photos were unauthorized. It read in part,
It has since come to our attention that the individual who supplied the photographs to us had no right to do so and the photographs were not authorized for publication. The photographs were private photographs and Madonna owns the copyright in the photographs. Had we been aware of this at the time we would never have published the photographs….We also wish to offer our sincere apologies to Madonna and her family for any embarrassment or distress caused by publication of the photographs.
Can you say “collectors item?”
This is not the first time OK! has landed in hot water over these photographs. The magazine was fined for misleading readers by referring to the wedding on its cover but not running any celebration pictures. According to one fan, people were chomping at the bit to see them.
But that was then and this is now.
Reportedly, Madonna is about to sue the pants off OK! for its latest infraction despite a very strongly worded apology and retraction. The entire operation could be going down the tubes as a result of this action.
In fact, I may have noted a new editor-in-chief at OK! Or was that just my ‘magination?