Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Privacy Law
The First Amendment And The Right(S) Of Publicity, Jennifer E. Rothman, Robert C. Post
The First Amendment And The Right(S) Of Publicity, Jennifer E. Rothman, Robert C. Post
All Faculty Scholarship
The right of publicity protects persons against unauthorized uses of their identity, most typically their names, images, or voices. The right is in obvious tension with freedom of speech. Yet courts seeking to reconcile the right with the First Amendment have to date produced only a notoriously confused muddle of inconsistent constitutional doctrine. In this Article, we suggest a way out of the maze. We propose a relatively straightforward framework for analyzing how the right of publicity should be squared with First Amendment principles.
At the root of contemporary constitutional confusion lies a failure to articulate the precise state interests …
Making News: Balancing Newsworthiness And Privacy In The Age Of Algorithms, Erin C. Carroll
Making News: Balancing Newsworthiness And Privacy In The Age Of Algorithms, Erin C. Carroll
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In deciding privacy lawsuits against media defendants, courts have for decades deferred to the media. They have given it wide berth to determine what is newsworthy and so, what is protected under the First Amendment. And in doing so, they have often spoken reverently of the editorial process and journalistic decision-making.
Yet, in just the last several years, news production and consumption has changed dramatically. As we get more of our news from digital and social media sites, the role of information gatekeeper is shifting from journalists to computer engineers, programmers, and app designers. The algorithms that the latter write …
How The Movies Became Speech, Samantha Barbas
How The Movies Became Speech, Samantha Barbas
Journal Articles
In its 1915 decision in Mutual Film v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, the Supreme Court held that motion pictures were, as a medium, unprotected by freedom of speech and press because they were mere “entertainment” and “spectacles” with a “capacity for evil.” Mutual legitimated an extensive regime of film censorship that existed until the 1950s. It was not until 1952, in Burstyn v. Wilson, that the Court declared motion pictures to be, like the traditional press, an important medium for the communication of ideas protected by the First Amendment. By the middle of the next decade, film censorship in the …