[bots]

of all the hassle that the queen had to endure, i think what harry called his child was the least of it. I don't put much weight on the words of some aide that wants to make a few bucks selling a book

[joeysteele]

On this issue, I've no time for.
Lillibet is not exclusively a pet name just for the late Queen.

What nonsense..

There were Elizabeth's in even my own family, one of which I was told was always getting lillibet.
She was born in 1919/20.
Way before the late Queen.

I'd imagine it's been a pet name for many Elizabeth's over centuries.

What parents call their children is THEIR choice.
Not anyone elses.

I could grumble at many names parents call their children but it's their business, not mine.

I find it frankly ridiculous and astounding, if this is really true and not just some attention seekers nonsense,.
That any great grandmother would not be proud to have a great granddaughter named after her, either with other name or pet name.

Utterly ridiculous.

[bots]

i'm in 100% agreement Joey, i don't believe the queen was upset by it at all. It's just not how people behave. She may have lived a privileged life, but she wasn't insane

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

On this issue, I've no time for.
Lillibet is not exclusively a pet name just for the late Queen.

What nonsense..

There were Elizabeth's in even my own family, one of which I was told was always getting lillibet.
She was born in 1919/20.
Way before the late Queen.

I'd imagine it's been a pet name for many Elizabeth's over centuries.

What parents call their children is THEIR choice.
Not anyone elses.

I could grumble at many names parents call their children but it's their business, not mine.

I find it frankly ridiculous and astounding, if this is really true and not just some attention seekers nonsense,.
That any great grandmother would not be proud to have a great granddaughter named after her, either with other name or pet name.

Utterly ridiculous.

Yes was going to say the same thing. I couldn't imagine it

[jet]

There was no comment at all originally from the Queen about them calling their child Lilibet. The media, including the BBC, speculated about whether the Queen would approve or not and Harry jumped in and threatened legal action against anyone who would suggest that the Queen hadn’t given them her blessing. He then applied to the palace to support his narrative, which they refused to do because it wasn’t true.
Harry and Meghan had made up their own ‘truth’ as usual, and no more was heard of legal actions.
Whether the Queen cared or not that the baby was to be called Lilibet isn’t known, what is known is that she wasn’t going to agree to sentiments that she had never said. After enduring all the lies that they had recently told on Oprah, I wouldn’t be surprised if she was at the end of her tether with the pair of them by that stage.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by jet

There was no comment at all originally from the Queen about them calling their child Lilibet. The media, including the BBC, speculated about whether the Queen would approve or not and Harry jumped in and threatened legal action against anyone who would suggest that the Queen hadn’t given them her blessing. He then applied to the palace to support his narrative, which they refused to do because it wasn’t true.
Harry and Meghan had made up their own ‘truth’ as usual, and no more was heard of legal actions.
Whether the Queen cared or not that the baby was to be called Lilibet isn’t known, what is known is that she wasn’t going to agree to sentiments that she had never said. After enduring all the lies that they had recently told on Oprah, I wouldn’t be surprised if she was at the end of her tether with the pair of them by that stage.

While I can accept now completely that the Queen was rightly cheesed off with the Sussexes.
I'll never be able to see or think of the late Queen as being spiteful in any shape or form as to a new born baby.
Any new born baby never mind her own great Granddaughter.
Certainly never over a name or pet name either.

I cannot see that being in the Queen's nature whatsoever.
I think this is a personal attention seeker's nonsense and a then media whipping up of it.

That I find disrespectful to the late Queen when she is not now here to set the record straight.

[jet]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

of all the hassle that the queen had to endure, i think what harry called his child was the least of it. I don't put much weight on the words of some aide that wants to make a few bucks selling a book

Robert Hardman, the author, wasn't/isn't an aide.

Robert Hardman is an internationally renowned writer and broadcaster, specializing in royalty and history for more than twenty five years.
He has previously written the acclaimed books Monarchy: The Royal Family at Work, Our Queen and Queen of the World, along with the BBC and ITV television documentaries of the same name. Among other television credits, he wrote and presented the BBC Two documentary George III – The Genius of the Mad King and wrote the BBC series, The Queen’s Castle. Hardman interviewed the Prince of Wales for the BBC’s Charles at 60, the Duke of Edinburgh for the BBC’s The Duke: In His Own Words and the Princess Royal for ITV’s Anne: The Princess Royal at 70.

[UserSince2005]

This dirty king needs to be gone. I miss my queeenie

[Livia]

I think if M&H had called their daughter Elizabeth, no one would have found that out of the ordinary. But Lilibet was the queen's nickname as a child, a very personal thing to her and I always found it quite a cynical choice.

[Glenn.]

The outrage over what parents call their own child reeks of entitlement. The same can be said for when Archie was born and the new parents quite rightly refused to parade the child for all to see. It’s disturbing.

[Liam-]

Lizzie being a spiteful, bitter woman over something that most people would be honoured about, really isn’t the win the crazies think it is

[Cal.]

I really doubt she took offence or even cared that much. I think the narrative she wasn't pleased is coming from her refusing to back up Harry's claims that he saught her blessing for the name when he hadn't.

[jet]

Additionally, H&M had privately trademarked the name Lilibet even before she was born for monetary purposes - before the Queen even learned of their intention to call her Lilibet.
What a way for the Sussexes to welcome their baby daughter into the world, with a web of lies and dodgy motives.

[Maru]

Her being upset privately is not "mean and spiteful" or anything like that. She's entitled to her feelings, whatever they were, in life and in death. Whether it is true or not, she didn't make her own association with it a public matter and that should be the bigger consideration. Why does anyone feel the need to trumpet their associations with anything royal or celebrity? It only impacts Lilibet negatively in the end. Perhaps they could've kept the usage of that name privately, but they wanted the association to be very public clearly. It's especially difficult for the girls as the media tends to become obsessed with the female family members as they grow up, so I can only think this was a very bad judgement call on their behalf if they wanted them to grow up away from "that life"...

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by jet

Additionally, H&M had privately copyrighted the name Lilibet even before she was born for monetary purposes - before the Queen even learned of their intention to call her Lilibet.
What a way for the Sussexes to welcome their baby daughter into the world, with a web of lies and dodgy motives.

So how have they been monetising the name?

[arista]

Originally Posted by Maru

Her being upset privately is not "mean and spiteful" or anything like that. She's entitled to her feelings, whatever they were, in life and in death. Whether it is true or not, she didn't make her own association with it a public matter and that should be the bigger consideration. Why does anyone feel the need to trumpet their associations with anything royal or celebrity? It only impacts Lilibet negatively in the end. Perhaps they could've kept the usage of that name privately, but they wanted the association to be very public clearly. It's especially difficult for the girls as the media tends to become obsessed with the female family members as they grow up, so I can only think this was a very bad judgement call on their behalf if they wanted them to grow up away from "that life"...

Yes, it's her Private Feelings.

Buggers, digging up all this

[bots]

Originally Posted by jet

Additionally, H&M had privately copyrighted the name Lilibet even before she was born for monetary purposes - before the Queen even learned of their intention to call her Lilibet.
What a way for the Sussexes to welcome their baby daughter into the world, with a web of lies and dodgy motives.

I don't think that would be possible

[jet]

I think I should have used the term ‘trademarked’ not 'copyrighted’, though I don’t really understand the difference.

Should You Trademark Your Baby's Name?

Parents have a right to trademark their minor children's names, according to U.S. law, but the name has to be both distinctive and connected to some expectation of commercial enterprise.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/blue-...mark_b_1277254

[jet]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

So how have they been monetising the name?

They can't. The Royal Institution forbids the monetization of their family minors for commercial purposes.

[Glenn.]

Why did you bring it up then

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by jet

They can't. The Royal Institution forbids the monetization of their family minors for commercial purposes.

So they haven't actually done what you definitively stated they had?

"a web of lies and dodgy motives."

[jet]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

So they haven't actually done what you definitively stated they had?

"a web of lies and dodgy motives."

Can you point out the 'lies and dodgy motives' that you attribute to me?
I said they had trademarked the name for monetary purposes, which they had. They subsequently discovered that its use was forbidden by the Institution. Harry should have known this, but well, he’s Harry….and when Meghan sniffs dollar signs she just blunders ahead regardless.

[bots]

really, who gives a ****. The queen is dead, she can't complain any more

[Livia]

People clearly give a **** or no one would be posting in this thread.

[Glenn.]

Meghan and Harry live in people’s heads rent free