posted July 11, 2003 03:45 PM         

THE Prince of Wales is understood to be concerned over the crisis surrounding the memorial fund set up in honour of his former wife.

The Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund announced it had been forced to freeze grants to good causes, blaming a costly court battle.

The fund had unsuccessfully sued the US firm Franklin Mint for making Diana dolls and outfits - a court battle which left it with a £4 million legal bill.

The US firm is now counter-suing the fund in a £15 million lawsuit for malicious prosecution, which the charity said had caused today's crisis.

Voluntary groups - 120 of whom benefit from the fund - expressed dismay at the announcement, with some predicting it could be catastrophic for their work.

They include HIV/Aids treatment centres and landmine clearance projects - causes which were championed by Diana in her charity work.

Charles was believed to be hopeful that the situation would be resolved quickly, sources said.
His own charity, which works with the fund on schemes involving young asylum seekers, expressed "regret" that projects could be jeopardised.

"The Diana Memorial Fund carries out very valuable work to support a variety of people facing negative circumstances in their lives," a Prince's Trust spokeswoman said.

posted July 11, 2003 07:47 PM         

Neither of those should have passed into the public domain but should rightly reside in her estate or assigns.

posted July 11, 2003 08:47 PM         

Was the suit adjudicated in Britain or the US? Try making a Frank Sinatra doll and see how fast the heirs sue unless they've licensed you to do so.

Malicious prosecution can't be sustained unless the plaintiff in the original suit had no reasonable basis to believe the suit was viable. In most of these types of actions, the trial judge grants summary judgment to the defendant in the malicious prosecution action---at least in the US.

I agree, it doesn't seem right for a company to enrich themselves on the good name and reputation of another.

Perhaps the malicious prosecution suit is designed to stop the Fund from appealing the decision or filing another suit by burying them in a sea of litigation with the attendant legal fees.

How are you doing?

posted July 12, 2003 08:09 AM         

I don't know where the suit was adjudicated. UK & USA laws are very different. I'd take a wild guess and say it may have been in the US but only because that's where Franklin Mint are based.

I worked with product development, brands etc for 12 years and I'm wondering if the fund didn't get "all their ducks in a row" re registering/licensing Diana as a "brand name" etc. I could be wrong about that but in my experience you just can't "get away with" selling products that are legally protected. Exactly as you said Jwhop with your example of Frank Sinatra. If you don't cover your back with these kind of things in every country around the world then someone will "bite ya". With a name as big as Diana's that should have been done. It's expensive to do that but not as expensive as this lawsuit has now been for them.

I too agree, that it doesn't seem right for a company to enrich themselves on the good name and reputation of another.

Franklin Mint are no "small potato" and I would be very surprised if their "legals" hadn't thoroughly checked this all out before they started marketing their Diana products. You would have hoped that they would have worked with the fund with those products so that they both benefited but you know the old saying "business is business".

I'm sure more details will eventually come to light re all of this. This is the first time I've heard that there was a problem and it's obviously been going on for a long time.
Obviously to date we haven't heard Franklin Mints side of the story and maybe when that happens the full picture will be revealed.
Sue

posted July 12, 2003 10:30 AM         

It's a great shame that these two organisations can't talk and sort it out between them - but I guess that would depend on the "personalities" involved. At the end of the day, the only winners here will be the lawyers
Sue

Here's the article.....

Diana Lawsuit 'Will Not Hurt Charities'

THE company suing the Princess Diana charity fund has insisted that it was not being driven by malice.

The damages action by American-based Franklin Mint has been described as an "unnecessary malicious prosecution" by the chief executive of the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund, Dr Andrew Purkis.

The fund has been forced to freeze all grants because it is being sued by the Mint over a failed legal bid two years ago to stop it producing Diana dolls and other memorabilia.

More than 100 charities that depend on the fund are now desperately searching for new donors.

But the Mint's UK spokesman Steven Locke insisted the fund had fought a "suicidal" legal action and should be held accountable for its "bad behaviour".

"The six years of vicious legal action that we have faced from the Diana Fund has cost us already millions and millions of dollars in legal fees," he said.

"They have been fighting us for six years, they have lost at every stage throughout that six years. They have also waged a very nasty PR campaign against us, and we think they should be held accountable. That is why we are taking this action.

"When we have found out how much money we are going to be awarded by the court, we are then going to give it to charitable causes. In the past when we have given money connected to Diana we have always given it to charities that she supported in her lifetime.

"Just because the Diana Fund is a charity, that does not excuse it from extremely bad behaviour.

posted July 12, 2003 11:42 PM         

One can only hope those who are attempting to make money off her name are rejected by the public as greedy opportunists. I would be happy indeed to see their bottom line take a hit for their greed and attempts to highjack her name and likeness.

There almost has to be more to this story or the charity would have prevailed in court.

posted July 13, 2003 05:21 AM         

Lottery May Bail Out Diana Charities

LOTTERY cash could be used to plug the funding gap left after the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund froze all its charitable grants.

The fund, set up after the 1997 death of the Princess, was forced to cancel payments to its beneficiaries amid a bitter and costly legal wrangle with a US-based souvenir firm.

But the Community Fund, which distributes National Lottery cash to good causes, said it was investigating whether it could fast track applications from the stricken charities.

Some 120 good causes and 500 jobs worldwide are now under threat and the memorial fund has approached scores of potential alternative donors, including the Lottery, for help.

A Community Fund spokeswoman said: "There is lots of good work in progress and obviously people do not want to see those efforts wasted.

"We will not be in a position to say whether we will be able to help some of the charities out for another week but we are looking into the legal case for doing so."

In the period 2001-02, £361 million of Lottery cash was donated in grants to good causes. Six per cent of the annual budget must be given to UK-based charities working abroad.

Meanwhile, the Pennsylvania-based memorabilia firm, the Franklin Mint, showed no sign of backing down from its £15 million "malicious prosecution" action against the memorial fund.

The suit stems from an unsuccessful court attempt by the fund in 2000 to stop the Mint producing Diana dolls and other mementoes carrying her image.

posted July 14, 2003 02:44 PM         

I haven't seen anything re his thoughts on Diana's death. Has he published them in a book? We don't seem to hear anything about him these days here in the UK.

I think there are a lot of people who believe Diana's death was not an accident. In a lot of ways I feel it's similar to the confusion there still is over Marilyn Monroes death. Two almost fairytale stories with tragic endings

posted July 14, 2003 02:56 PM         

jwhop

posted July 15, 2003 08:46 AM         

Yup Cat, I see the same intrigue and inconvenience between the women. M.M.`s death was just too timely, as was Dianas .

posted July 16, 2003 04:03 PM         

What're your thoughts about James Hewitt? Here's an article just now in the news....

Hewitt Reveals Diana Sex Secrets
-- Latest headlines on AOL

JAMES Hewitt, the former lover of Diana, Princess of Wales, has boasted in a TV documentary that she was fantastic in bed.

The 45-year-old former cavalry officer makes the claim in a Channel 4 documentary that is certain to leave Princes William and Harry fuming.

A film crew followed Hewitt as he attempted to sell love letters from the Princess for £10 million - which has already angered the Princes.

Hewitt claims the Prince of Wales would have known about Diana's relationship with him.

He says: "I think he would have been told by the security forces and other people who make it their duty to know what other people are doing."

He also claims Prince Charles would have been "grateful" for the five-year affair, because of his own relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles.

posted July 20, 2003 06:09 AM         

Here's the lastest

Hewitt Offers to Hand Over Letters'
-- Latest headlines on AOL

JAMES Hewitt, the former lover of Diana, Princess of Wales, has offered to hand over her love letters to her former husband - if he asks nicely, it was reported.

The former cavalry officer has attracted widespread criticism for allegedly attempting to sell the letters for up to £10 million.

The Sunday Telegraph quoted him as saying: "Were I to be invited by the Prince (of Wales) for tea and given the opportunity to discuss this matter in a reasoned way, I would of course be willing to respond.

"I might add that so far no one has made any attempt to show me such consideration."