Paris Hilton: I'm Illegally Keeping My $2 Million Engagement Ring!

Paris Hilton broke off her engagement with actor Chris Zylka.

Fans wonder exactly what happened. Chris wants to know when he's getting his $2 million engagement ring back.

It turns out that he could be left waiting a long time. Paris says that she's keeping it, no matter what the law says.

For a topic as emotionally sensitive as the fate of a $2 million engagement ring, you want the best interviewer -- but that's not always what you get.

Jenny McCarthy took a break from urging parents to let their children die of preventable disease rather than vaccinate.

The plague enthusiast sat down with Paris Hilton on SiriusXM's The Jenny McCarthy Show.

"What did you wind up doing with the ring?" McCarthy asks the actress, model, singer, and entrepreneur.

"Do you get to keep it because it was probably discounted or a promotional thing?" she asks.

The answer is a little more complicated than yes or no.

"The person who we got it from got millions and millions of dollars of free publicity," Paris says.

As was previously established, the $2 million ring with which Chris Zylka proposed was heavily discounted.

This came in part from a desire for exposure and in part from the jeweler's relationship with Hilton.

"So," Paris continues. "I love how social media has basically become a new form of commercials. Yeah, it's pretty sick."

"So then," McCarthy asks. "Wouldn't they say, go ahead and keep the ring?"

"Yeah," Paris replies.

"Good for you!" McCarthy cheers.

"Diamonds are a girl's best friend," Paris quotes.

It's a great line -- for the diamond industry.

Diamonds are, of course, simple carbon, and would have little economic value if they weren't warehoused en masse to create a false scarcity.

"And," McCarthy adds: "It's a f--king engagement ring."

McCarthy concludes: "Even if you are the one who broke up with him, but that's okay"

Why does it matter who broke up with whom?

Well, California law is pretty clear about engagement rings.

California Civil Code 1590 says that "gifts made in contemplation of marriage are revocable if the marriage doesn't take place."

This doesn't extend to buying dinner for a date or a fiancee, but it does include engagement rings.

The law says that the ring must be returned if the recipient -- that's Paris -- refuses the marriage.

We should note that the law also applies if the marriage is mutually abandoned.

Now, maybe what this means is that there was a behind-the-scenes deal.

Chris could have agreed to let her keep the extremely pricey ring, even though it's just a drop in the bucket to her net worth.

He himself has a net worth of about $4 million. He's rich, but ... not compared to Paris.

Paris keeping the ring could also mean something else.

Maybe it means that Paris is f--king daring Chris to make an issue of the ring's ownership or to take her to court.

It is possible that their breakup was less amicable than the public was led to believe.