New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

3-8/3-10-2016 Notes

by: Meagan Mowery

3-8/3-10-2016 Notes MC 401

Meagan Mowery

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

Intrusion, etc.
Law and Regulation
Class Notes
25 ?




Popular in Law and Regulation

Popular in Journalism and Mass Communications

This 5 page Class Notes was uploaded by Meagan Mowery on Sunday April 3, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to MC 401 at University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa taught by Bunker in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 32 views. For similar materials see Law and Regulation in Journalism and Mass Communications at University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa.

Popular in Journalism and Mass Communications


Reviews for 3-8/3-10-2016 Notes


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 04/03/16
3/8/2016 Discussion: Hulk Hogan case in Florida  Secret recording- participant monitoring  One party knows recording is going on  Is this a crime? In most of the states it’s not a crime. Florida: Athlete at FSU, prosecuted for a recording  A tort? (Dietemann v. Time, Inc.) Doctor from California. Really a Plummer. Time magazine goes and pretends to be patients in his own house. It’s his house. That’s what intrudes on his privacy. Dietemann wins the case.  What about broadcasting? No permission, the FCC can come after you. Cops private places; violation of intrusion? Yes. Doesn’t matter if the cops are there, you still don’t have the right to intrude on someone else’s property.  Entering private profperty with the police (ride along) is very dangerously lately.  Police have a right to be there (search warrant) – you don’t. Private Torts 1. Appropriation (aka Right of Publicity)  Definition: Unauthorized commercial use of a person’s name, likeness, ETC., Especially in an advertising/PR/marketing context.  Typically involves a celebrity, but not exclusively.  Video game cases muddy the water here.  Defenses: (1) Newsworthiness  (2) Consent -Have it written -scope & duration Private Facts 2. Publication of Private Facts – Communicating private, often humiliating, information to the public that is not of legitimate public concern.  You can be liable for truthful information via this tort!!!  Plaintiff must show: (1) Publication is highly offensive to a reasonable person; (2) Publication is NOT newsworthy. Private Facts (Cont.)  Frequent Fact Patterns:  Sexual matters  Physical or mental health  Criminal Activity  Eccentric Behavior  Examples: Diaz v. Oakland Tribune (1983) Student body pres of local college (diaz), Tribune published a column that they were transgendered. Great links to conceal this. Private: The person didn’t want it out there.  Sipple v. Chronicle Publishing (1984) Oliver Sipple, Woman tries to shoot president. Sipple had stopped her. Never reveal sexual orientation. He sued that he was gay cause it was private but he had already told a lot of people that he was…  Difference between these two cases?  Time typically does not alter result – once a public fact, always a public fact. Once something is out there, it’s out there.  Matters of public record, e.g., criminal conviction, are not private facts.  Private Facts meets the first amendment 1 is higher in law Conflict 1 : protects PF: prevents  Cox Broadcasting v. Cohn (1975) ATL TV station. Raped girl. Also murdered. Father died. Broadcasted dead girl. Invasion of privacy. NO.  Florida Star v. BJF (1989) also a rape victim. Police records. Newspaper. Not a very experienced reporter. Publication of private facts… but…  In both cases, Frist Amendment trumped privacy rights of victims. 3/10/2016 Discussion: Hulk Hogan case in Florida Pras Michel (Rapper) Recap: Private facts: Keep that private information private. Have to be widely disseminated? Yes. Main defense? Newsworthiness. Intrusion: Want that you didn’t get? Want to write to privacy in an area where you can have privacy. Right to a private secluded moment. Publicly disseminated? No. Publication is irrelevant. Minute you intrude is the tort. Main Defense? Not reasonable. Unreasonable. Wasn’t your private place. Test: reasonable expectation to privacy. False Light: Plaintiff wanted but didn’t get: to be represented accurately in front of the public. Disseminated? Yes. Has to go out to a whole bunch of people. Really good defense? It really is the truth. Appropriation: Living person wants? Right to control commercial uses of your persona. Voice, etc. Public Dissemination? Yes. Defense? Consent. Especially in writing. Summary of Privacy Torts 1. False Light- protects right to be represented accurately. Good defense: truth. 2. Intrusion- protects right to a scheduled moment. Good defense: No reasonable expectation. 3. Appropriation – protects right to control commercial uses of one’s persona. Good Defense: consent. 4. Private Facts – protects private info about plaintiff. Good Defense: Newsworthiness. Infliction of Emotional Distress (Intentional/Negligence) What is Infliction?  Conduct that is outrageous and exceeds the bounds of decency so far as to be intolerable in a civilized community.  Tort is also known as “Outrage”  In Florida: “The Tort of Outrage” Infliction Tort vs. First Amendment Larry Flint. Founder of Hustler Magazine. Jerry Falwell talks about his first time. Everyone knew he wouldn’t say these things. Oh he really had sex with his mom? No. He’s upset.  Hustler v. Falwell (1988)  Jerry Falwell (public figure), televangelist, sued Hustler and publisher Larry Flynt for libel, false light, and infliction of emotional distress (intentional!)  Ad parody portrayed Falwell in despicable manner  Libel and false light failed – why?  Supreme Court said ad was “gross and repugnant” but still protected Hustler against Falwell’s infliction claim.  Supremes: Public figures who seek infliction damages must show actual malice just as in a libel case.  Holding prevents “end run” around First Amendment by bringing infliction claim rather than libel.  Scary to allow juries lose with ambiguous infliction standard.  Snyder v. Phelps (2011) – very fact specific holding  Father of this young man that was killed, sued.  Victory for church: political speech, might not like it, but it’s about the country and it’s policies.  Didn’t do it right in the guys face. Didn’t even see it that day. See’s it on TV.  Not in his face at his son’s funeral.  Protected speech.  Armstrong v. H & C Communications demonstrates that infliction isn’t dead yet – still a threat to media.  Infliction is not dead.  Orlando. TV news operation.  20 years ago.  Young girl kidnapped, disappears. 9 or 10 years old.  Find her remains.  TV news operation goes to the place and asks about the dead girl, they say yes they have it and they even show the news people… get it on camera.  The guy let them in to let them get videos of bones, skull… !!!!  They decide to put it on the air…  News director says, “F it, lets run it.”  Family see’s it on the TV… little sister distraught.  Wins the case… large $$$ won in case for the family.


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

25 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Janice Dongeun University of Washington

"I used the money I made selling my notes & study guides to pay for spring break in Olympia, Washington...which was Sweet!"

Bentley McCaw University of Florida

"I was shooting for a perfect 4.0 GPA this semester. Having StudySoup as a study aid was critical to helping me achieve my goal...and I nailed it!"


"Their 'Elite Notetakers' are making over $1,200/month in sales by creating high quality content that helps their classmates in a time of need."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.