"Privacy doesn't just belong to the palace, it belongs separately and severally to Meghan and Harry," attorney Mark Stephens told an outlet.
This insight comes after the Dutch edition of the book was pulled from shelves over a "translation error" that revealed King Charles III and Kate, Princess of Wales, were allegedly the "royal racists" who asked about Prince Archie's skin color in 2019.
"Presumably Meghan and Harry have given a solemn undertaking that this should never see the light of day, and given their absolute horror at invasions of privacy, it is frankly astonishing that they haven't already instructed Schillings [their legal team] to issue injunctive proceedings against Omid Scobie. He's let the cat out of the bag, and they can also get the injunction against the world — and it could be the great rapprochement," the legal analyst added.
Stephens continued: "Any injunction would apply to future publication or repetition of the names and could be sought at the High Court in London. You're mainly looking to prevent him or anyone else from repeating information that should have never seen the light of day."
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have never taken steps to name the racist royal they alluded to in their 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey, which could be their grounds for suing.
"The way that Harry and Meghan demonstrate that they didn't want to see this in the public domain is by getting an injunction against the person who's breached their confidence. The moral imperative is that they must—given their widely known concerns about privacy and seeing another member of the family suffer as well as themselves suffer from an invasion of privacy — they would want to do everything they could to prevent it going further," Stephens concluded.
Still, there are others who feel the copy error is simply a ploy to create divisions withing the royal family. By naming the King and the Princess of Wales, some think this is a way to further anger Prince William beyond any frustration he feels for Harry and Meghan.
"It seems intended to create a strategic rift between the king and William, which raises questions about who may be feeding that and who benefits from it," chair of Reputation Management Consultants, Eric Schiffer, told a publication.
"The question is was this fed by Harry with the intent to destroy the close relationship between William and the king, and if so its a new act of war," he added.
Newsweek reported on Stephens and Schiffer's remarks.