Felix Damm, the long-standing press lawyer for the Schumacher household, has mentioned the administration of the intensive privateness surrounding Michael Schumacher‘s well being.
He additionally spoke concerning the absence of an official report on his situation, virtually 10 years after his snowboarding accident in Meribel, France.
Uncommon video of Michael Schumacher’s wild aspect within the 90s
Damm recalled the extraordinary media presence exterior Grenoble Hospital within the days following the accident, the place the primary common particulars about Schumacher‘s accidents have been shared throughout press conferences with treating physicians.
“I nonetheless have in my thoughts the picture of the numerous journalists and photographers who, for days after the accident, waited for data exterior the hospital in Grenoble,” he instructed the German publication LTO.
“To alleviate the stress, the primary common details about the accidents was given at press conferences at which the treating medical doctors have been additionally current.
“In actuality, the content material was categorized as non-public. That was actually new. Till then, details about non-public issues had been completely taboo.”
Concerning the absence of a last well being report on the F1 legend, Damm revealed that they thought of it however determined towards it.
Such a report could be inadequate as the general public would constantly search updates, making a authorized dilemma in the event that they wished to suppress the knowledge later.
“It was at all times about defending non-public issues,” Damm added.
F1 such as you’ve by no means seen earlier than: Verstappen’s Pink Bull automobile goes rallying in Australia
“After all, we mentioned rather a lot about methods to make it doable, so we additionally thought of whether or not a last report on Michael‘s well being could be the precise method to do it.
“However that will not have been the tip and there would have needed to be consistently up to date studies.
“The media, time and again, would ask ‘And the way is he now?’, one, two, three months or years after the message.
“And if we then needed to take motion towards this data, we must cope with the argument of the voluntary disclosure we’d have made.”
Damm additionally highlights that not even buddies can talk about Schumacher‘s situation, as doing so might be legally challenged.
This safeguards towards the involuntary disclosure of personal data by buddies or acquaintances.
“If it isn’t the individual involved himself however buddies or acquaintances who disclose non-public data, it isn’t a case of ‘voluntary self-disclosure’ of privateness,” Damm famous.
“Due to this fact, the info topic can defend himself towards disclosure of personal circumstances even when the knowledge comes from acquaintances”.
What can we learn about Michael Schumacher’s well being?
Little is thought about Schumacher‘s present situation, besides that he emerged from a coma in 2014 and stays unable to speak or stroll. It’s recognized that he’s cared for at residence by a considerable medical employees.
Damm‘s authorized actions towards media retailers publishing inaccurate data have offered the restricted perception into Schumacher‘s scenario.
The lawyer notes the media’s capacity to manufacture tales based mostly on minimal data, highlighting situations the place magazines created content material by AI-generated interviews.
Damm acknowledged that followers are anticipating updates on Schumacher‘s situation however believes that almost all supporters can perceive and respect the necessity for privateness as a result of ongoing course of because the accident.
“Sadly, a latest press report forces us to make clear that the declare that Michael may transfer once more will not be true,” he acknowledged.
“I used to be shocked at how a lot the media report even though there is no such thing as a dependable data; how a lot supposed tales might be spun from zero data.
“Because of this, it went to this point that Die Aktuelle merely invented an AI-generated interview and put it on the entrance web page.
“When {a magazine} headline mentioned ‘He’s not with us’ and created the tasteless impression that Michael Schumacher had died, the writer needed to pay 100,000 euros for this.
“I do not know of any case by which a better financial compensation needed to be paid for the publication of a judgement. This could undoubtedly be thought of a hit.”
