> The blackmail attempt happened during ongoing negotiations with over potential legal claims against one another. This is where AMI's argument falls apart. 1

> The blackmail attempt happened during ongoing negotiations with over potential legal claims against one another. This is where AMI's argument falls apart. 1. The photos were somehow acquired without permission. Meaning Bezos and/or Sanchez were victims of some sort of (likely illegal) invasion of privacy. 2. AMI is threatening to publish the photos despite not having permission to reproduce the photos from the copyright holders (Bezos/Sanchez). 3. AMI is making this threat on the dubious legal grounds of "fair use" by claiming that nude photos of a businessman's girlfriend are "newsworthy" because that somehow speaks to his business judgment. 4. Aren't seeking a monetary settlement but instead are asking the victims to (i) sign a legal document stating they have not in fact been victims of a crime at all[1] and (ii) make a public statement that is both against their interests and untrue. That is _far_ from a good faith negotiation and it was only one way. AMI has no claim to release against Bezos or Sanchez, they're only offering to not do what they legally can't do anyway: publish pictures they do not own without permission. [1] From proposed settlement terms: "AM affirms that it undertook no electronic eavesdropping in connection with its reporting and has no knowledge of such conduct."