Why bother Max? It's not like the French haven't seen this all already. Trying to seize all papers showing these images? What? It's far too little, far too late.

Your name has been besmirched already, stop making a further fool out of yourself by trying to hide this dirty little "secret" of yours. The cat is out of the bag, and is apparantley in a nazi uniform...

Paris, well, I'm sure El Reg readers can work that one out...

Why waste important peoples time applying for these injunctions in this day and internet age? Plus everyones seen it now.

Mines the coat next to Mosley's he'll be along in a minute to pick his up!

I can't help thinking that Ron Dennis' reaction to Max Mosley's situation runs something like: "sweet".

Well I suppose refering to one of the whores as an inmate, checking her for lice, and counting how many times she gets whipped in German doesn't look good, and the silly Herr Flick accent.

But I'm sure Max is telling the truth

' The judge accepted that the material was intrusive and demeaning, but: "The dam has effectively burst... the granting of an order against this respondent at the present juncture would merely be a futile gesture." '

What does that mean? If enough people demean you it's legal?

Great news for newspapers: want to slander someone? Just release the evidence to the internet before you go to the presses.

"We plead the Max Mosley cat-out-of-the-bag defence. Yeah, we smeared his reputation, but it was on the internet."

Do we have to add "so it must be true"?

(It's not a dead vulture, it's just a dead beak.)

All I hope is that he will order costs against Moseley for attempting to bring such a futile injunction.

Between this, the divorce-by-internet-video case and Heather I'm-such-a-wronged-woman Mills, is there anyone who can lend me a can of the reality spray ??

I'm sure Gordon Britain-is-in-a-great-shape-under-Labour Brown could do with a whiff of that, too !!

"Great news for newspapers: want to slander someone? Just release the evidence to the internet before you go to the presses."

Slander would be different. Slander is untrue, and I don't think anyone is denying that this video is a truthful record. I agree it is a rather surprising turn of phrase from the judge, nonetheless. It smacks of "what's done is done", which I suspect wouldn't be accepted as a defence in most cases!

I think you will find that the judge is right and you have some sort of reading disorder. He didn't say it was legal nor imply that it was legal, in fact it's illegality isn't issue, it's the enforcement of a ban AFTER it has hit the Internet FFS. Bolt stable door after the horse has bolted scenario.

Of course if you can tell us how to guarantee removal of all this material from the Internet I am sure that the judge will change his mind about the ban.

What a stupid thing to do - the more he launches these silly legal cases, the more publicity it drums up, drawing more and more awareness of the very thing he's so desperate to hide. Get over it, Max, move on.

Whats that? A sensible decision by a UK judge? I bet that rabble rouser wont last long on the bench.

Paris, she always lasts long on the bench.

Stand up proud and shout, 'YES! I a, a multi-gazzilionaire, YES, I work in one of the sexiest (not boring) sports in the world and YES I love whipping multitudes of paid-for-lovelies who do rude things to me for cash!'

Mines the leather one with the open back.

P.S. Anyone know the collective noun for a group of paid-for-lovelies?

Of course the ban is unenforceable, but at least it would stop it from being on the official website of tabloids... And having more pictures printed in more newspapers. I'm not sure I approve the judge's reasoning.

is to be "famous" and declare "humiliation!"

so now we can't report on scandals, financial crimes, hell if a politician murders someone, all they have to do is say "that story is ruining my career!" and the media is supposed to pull it? because a murder rap would surely ruin a career, and apparently proving or disproving the allegation has nothing to do with it.

What's next? banning videos of poliitical weenies on the campaign trail who are caught in ridiculous lies..err.."misspeakings" because it "embarasses" them?

One more brick against what little actual "free press" and "news" carried in the propaganda and entertainment rags called "media" these days.

So where's the link?

Secretgeek asks if anyone knows the collective noun for a group of paid-for-lovelies?

Until now there probably hasn't been one.

I'll start the ball rolling, with.... A "Mosley" of Mistresses.

> P.S. Anyone know the collective noun for a group of paid-for-lovelies?

Perhaps whord?

And my own thoughts on this:

Judge was smart enough to realize the damage was done.

Should have been smarter and enforced the ban on only the site which originally released it. Something needs to be a deterrent to privacy invasion, and watching every other site out there reap the benefits/hits of a video it first released might be just that.

Secretgeek:

Four scholars at Oxford were making their way down the street, and happened to see a group of ladies of the evening. “What’s this?” said the first. “A jam of tarts?” “Nay,” said the second, “an essay of Trollope’s.” “Rather, a flourish of strumpets,” advanced the third. “No, gentlemen,” concluded the last. “Here we have an anthology of pros.”

Source: http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/collectives.htm

Flawed comparison there.

You give a public speech, it can be reported.

You kill someone, it can be reported (although it damages the concept of "fair trial" IMHO).

You tape yourself in a private moment (even with fine ladies holding whips) and someone else decides to "leak" it, the media should not have the right to release it... unless of course you did something really stupid and used public funds to pay for your fun. :)

"P.S. Anyone know the collective noun for a group of paid-for-lovelies?"

I guess it would be 'a scandal of whores'.

"Anyone know the collective noun for a group of paid-for-lovelies?"

No but there's no harm in guessing. Is it a felch? A pitstop? A bondage? A reich?

Any other suggestions?

Parliament?

(or Congress, for the people over here)

You don't do your name honour - it's a string of cash misses, obviously ...

return $HOME;

A fanfare of strumpets?

A frost of hoars?

An essay of Trollope's?

But the best till last....

A pride of loins?

'unsavoury: morally offensive; "an unsavoury reputation"; "an unsavoury scandal"'

What is so "unsavoury" about someone enjoying consensual BDSM activities, El Reg?

"A pride of loins?"

That's possibly the best Reg comment ever.

But I will add another: a gash of whores?

Why would we French people want to watch this lame vid??? We all do worst every week-end (for those of us who have to work during the week, that is). Plus, sharing bed with nazis is something we're not really afraid of. You even get a free haircut afterward!

Funny thing is, if you want to have action with a IIIrd-Reich-like dressed lady, the last person you want to ask is a German lady. For some obscure reason, they tend to think it's not funny (not that I tried, of course...).

Only a certified halfwit would waste his dollar on blocking youtube at this late stage..... Oh wait, isn't that what Max called Jackie Stewart ? No Nazi connotations ? Oh come on ! Even Paris Hilton could point that out.

I've followed motorsport for about 39 of my 43 years, and it is my opinion that Max and Bernie have progressively chiselled away at the credibility of the sport since they deposed the previous incumbent (oddly enough another chappie with fascistic connections if certain sources are to be believed, one Jean Marie Balestre), but I do believe that the guys privacy has been intruded upon. Again though only a certified halfwit would fail to realise the potential for blackmail by those offering such services, or the glee that the tabloid press would take in ensuring the reports of such activities made the front page...