Media Privacy Laws in the Americas - Essay Example

Media Privacy Laws in the Americas Privacy laws are the laws set to protect and contend with the regulation of personal intelligence about personalities, which can be gathered by the government, public organizations as well as private institutions and then stored for future use. These privacy laws are painstaking in the milieu of a personality’s right to privacy or reasonable expectation of privacy (Fass, 1996). These privacy laws differ from one country to another. This report seeks to explore the difference and similarities between the media privacy laws of the United States and the Latin America. The privacy laws are generally classified into General privacy laws and specific privacy laws. He general privacy laws control the overall access of an individual’s personal information and alters the policies governing many different areas of information. On the other hand, the specific laws are made to regulate specific categories of information including privacy laws for health information, privacy laws for financial information, privacy laws for online information, privacy laws for communication and privacy laws for information (Chancer, 2005). The privacy laws of the United States consist of several dissimilar legal concepts. The modern tort law of the United States as a result of a legal pleading of the cause of action entails four different categories of the invasion of privacy: the intrusion of solitude, public disclosure of private facts, false light and appropriation. Intrusion of solitude The intrusion of solitude and seclusion in the United States occurs when one individual intrudes upon the private matter of another. In famous case of the 1944, Zelma Cason sued the author Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings for a portrayal in Rawlings’ hailed memoir, Cross Creek. The supreme court of Florida held that the facts of the case supported the cause of action for the invasion of privacy, but the proceedings later, they discovered no damages were incurred by the suing party and ended the case. In this case, Zelma’s privacy was intruded when Rawling’s portrayed her in her best-selling book the Cross Creek without her consent. In Latin America, the laws differ from one country to the other but despite their differences; their goals still remain the same. These laws vary significantly with the America laws. The Latin American countries do not have tort laws. This because the need to have them has been lessened by citizens, individuals and institutions which accept payment of certain expenses and damages plus the recovery might be restricted to the equivalent provisions of the labor codes for injuries. Other countries like Mexico have few exceptions restrict damages to concrete damages without pain and suffering compensation, or restrict punitive-like damages to a certain segment of concrete damage. Intrusion of seclusion occurs when a committer intentionally intrudes, electronically, physically, or then, upon the private or personal space, isolation, or seclusion of an individual, or the private and personal affairs or matters of concern of an individual, by the employment of the comitter’s electronic device, physical sense or devices to oversee, eavesdrop or overhear the individual’s personal and private matters, or through other investigation, examination or observation forms intrude upon an individual’s private affairs if the intrusion would be greatly offensive to reasonable individual. The hacking of someone’s computer is also an intrusion upon privacy type because it involves viewing or duplicating private information by either a still or video camera. In determining whether an intrusion has taken place, three things are put into consideration. First is the expectation of privacy, it is carried out to determine whether there was the intrusion, invitation or an exceedance of the invitation; or misrepresentation, deception, or fraud with the aim of gaining admission. Intrusion is the process of breaking in and gathering information whether to be published or not, the legal wrong occurs during the intrusion. In the United States, this law is inconclusive to the actions of journalists as it tends to justify for their actions. It is not a licence for them from torts and crimes but it lessens their situation. Public disclosure Public disclosure of the private truths or facts occurs when an individual reveals information which is not for public concern to the public and it then offends a reasonable individual. Different to slander and libel, uncovering a truth is no reason or defence for invading an individual’s privacy. Disclosure of private information entails publishing or widespread dissemination of little-known, private information and facts that are worthless for news, not public record parts, public proceedings, non-public interest, and would be belligerent to a reasonable individual when publicized. In the case of the Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration v. Robertson, 422 U.S. 255 (1975); respondents sued in the Administrator in the District Court for declining to make the requested reports available. This was after the Air Transport Association had demanded for its publication (Glasser, 2013). In Latin America, the public disclosure also happens. The Latin America officials are constantly dealing with the constant scrutiny by the public to reveal public procurement procedures and public officials’ private assets information. The stress in making the publication of public sector dealings and personal asset declarations legal is simply a move to protect the publication of government officials’ information in order to reveal corruption patterns (Pauley, 2007). The Latin American network for legislative transparency is body giving reports on the method and the conduction of the disclosure of legislator’s personal assets for Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Peru and Mexico. It analyses effectively the differences and similarities among dissimilar disclosure systems of the Latin American countries’ legislative segments. False light False light is a legal term referring to a tort regarding privacy similar to the defamation tort. For instance, the United States privacy laws entail non-public person’s privacy right of publicity hence putting them in a false light to the community; which is then balanced against the First Amendment right of free speech. These false light laws are targeted to protect a plaintiff’s intellectual or emotional norm. It protects the plaintiff from a publication by the defendant with the aim of the malice of defamation placing the plaintiff in a false light and is highly offensive and embarrassing to a reasonable individual. In proving a false light claim, the plaintiff must show where and how the defendant implied something false about him/her. The case of Gill v. Curtis Publ’g Co., 239 P.2d 630 (Cal. 1952) establishes the presence of a false light. In Gill, the “ladies home journal” published an article talking of love at first sight and explicates that it is merely based on sexual attraction and that it was “wrong” and leads to nothing but divorce (Strickland, 2008). This article featured a photo of a couple with a retort "[p] publicized as glamorous, desirable, 'love at first sight' is a bad risk." The couple was unaware of the taken photo and on realizing this, they sued it. Even though the article never really said the couple’s love was based on the “wrong” love, the implication was clearly present. Latin American countries do not have a specific law that protects the damaging of someone’s image through false light, but it however does not protect someone from the actions of malice and will consequently deprive the individual the right to freedom when the actions are clearly prohibited by the law. Appropriation of name or likeness Most states in the united states have enacted laws prohibiting an individual from using another’s name or image without consent of those individuals’ with the aim of commercial benefit. The action for misappropriation of right of publicity defends an individual against the loss resulting from the appropriation of personal likeness just too commercially exploits them. The same way a trademark protects and idea or label is the same way the law tort protects someone’s name and image from distortion, exploitation and misuse. The Latin American countries do not have a particular law preventing this from happening but its damage and compensation depends on the justification. Privacy rights of public figures United States of America In the United States, the celebrities or the public figures whether musicians, actors, sportsmen and women face the nightmare of their lives; a scrutiny of their private life through publication by the “paparazzi”. These freelance photographers constantly engage in taking candid picture of the public figures and sell them for publication. These paparazzi are fueled by the public’s hunger to consume on every little bit of gossip on the celebrities. Most of these intrusions take place in the public where privacy maintenance is very minimal. The United States constitution merely mentions the right of privacy but still, the court recognizes it as a constitutional right. This discrepancy is a consequence of the little scope of affairs that are painstaking private in the life of a celebrity. Celebrities have a tougher time recovering from the invasion of privacy when compared to private individuals. This incongruity is because of the little information scope that the public refers as private to a public image. A preeminent case of a public figure that successfully restricted the methods of paparazzi through the use of the judicial legal system; focused on Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis. Onassis filed a case against Ron Galella, paparazzi; for his unremitting surveillance and intrusion in their lives of her children and hers. The court ruled in her action, justifying that the right to privacy includes the “right to be left alone” and defines it further as the shielding of intimate and personal activities and characteristics from public gaze; to encompass for moments of freedom from the unending assault of the world together with the unfettered will of the public for the purpose of getting some portion of tranquility for contemplation and other purposes, losing the sweetness of life without it (Rossides, 2003). The court recognized that while Ms. Onassis could not prevent the capturing of her children’s photos together with her, she had the right to protect against given acts violated in the taking of the photos. Ms. Onassis eventually got a restraining order against Galilee. Galella to maintain 25 feet away from her and 30 feet away from her children. The reason as to why the celebrities and other public imagers in the United States fail to get protection from paparazzi lies in threefold examination. The first reason is that the position of this popular and famous person allows for these invasions. Second, the paparazzi often use the news-gathering and net worthiness defenses to defend their actions. Finally, the current privacy law's structure is not placed is such a way to provide celebrities with the appropriate protecting they require (Posner et al 1996). Privacy rights of public figures in Latin America Similar to the United States of America, the public figures in Latin countries also expect less privacy from the paparazzi. Their presidents’ like all the other presidents have the state protecting their right of privacy. For the top notch government officials, the court states that they should not offer themselves willingly to the public eye because it will result to public scrutiny tarnishing their names since their actions go past the private environment and that they belong to the empire of public debate. The law clearly states that it will offer little or no protection to government officials posing themselves for the media (Berlant, 2002). In the cases of sports, music, and acting celebrities; neither the constitution nor the court gives a keen attention to the violation of their private lives. A celebrity who feels like his/her privacy together with the family has been intruded, it is up to him/her to file for the intrusion and hopes the court to vote in his/her favor during the hearing. The conclusion is very visible. The United States government has employed laws protecting individuals from intrusion whether from the media or from fellow citizens. Their judicial system has many laws to protect the celebrities depending on the argument perspective. Most Latin American countries lack laws that protect intrusions hence keeping their information and lives at stake. It is therefore necessary to enact these laws and enforce them to protect the citizens because that is what a country and a constitution does for its people. Works cited Berlant, Lauren G. The Queen of America Goes to Washington City: Essays on Sex and Citizenship. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002. Print. Chancer, Lynn S. High-profile Crimes: When Legal Cases Become Social Causes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005. Internet resource. Fass, Paula S. Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Print. Glasser, Charles J. International Libel and Privacy Handbook: A Global Reference for Journalists, Publishers, Webmasters, and Lawyers. Hoboken, N.J: Bloomberg Press, 2013. Internet resource. Pauley, Garth E. Lbj's American Promise: The 1965 Voting Rights Address. College Station: Texas A & M Univ. Press, 2007. Print. Posner, Richard A, and Katharine B. Silbaugh. A Guide to America's Sex Laws. Chicago [u.a.: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1996. Print. Rossides, Daniel W. Communication, Media, and American Society: A Critical Introduction. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. Print. Strickland, Rennard, and Frank T. Read. The Lawyer Myth: A Defense of the American Legal Profession. Athens, OH: Swallow Press/Ohio University Press, 2008. Print. Read More