Reminds me of the follow case involving British satirical magazine Private Eye (this quoted from Wikipedia): "An unlikely piece of British legal history occurr

Reminds me of the follow case involving British satirical magazine Private Eye (this quoted from Wikipedia): "An unlikely piece of British legal history occurred in the case Arkell v. Pressdram. The plaintiff was the subject of an article relating to illicit payments, and for a change the magazine Private Eye had ample evidence to back up the article. Arkell’s lawyers wrote a letter in which, unusually, they said: “Our client’s attitude to damages will depend on the nature of your reply”. The response consisted, in part, of the following: “We would be interested to know what your client’s attitude to damages would be if the nature of our reply were as follows : Fuck off”." In UK legal circles a polite way of telling someone to fuck off is to refer them to Arkell v. Pressdram.