Overheads for Media Law and Ethics
Back to Mindich
Back to Media Law and Ethics
Back to Media Law and Ethics Schedule
1/18/01
Outline:
Three branches of government
Structure of State
and federal courts
|
|
US Supreme Court |
|
|
|
US Circuit Courts of App. |
State Supreme Court |
|
Federal Regulatory Agencies |
US District Courts |
State Court of Appeals |
|
|
|
State Trial Courts |
The rule of stare decisis
Types of law:
constitutional
statutory
administrative (FCC, for
example… see article in NYT, 1/17/01)
the common law (stare
decisis, precedent)
equity
Tort: civil wrong that creates right to sue
tort of negligence, tort of
malpractice, a (p. 18)
Damages: General, specific, punitive
Criminal and civil legal actions
Ethical Issue: Photograph of girls on fire escape
Home work: check out Web page for details
---------------------------------------------------------
1/23/01
On this day we reviewed the chronology of one court case, New York Times v. Sullivan. I followed the chronology set down in Overbeck, pp. 19-26 and brought in some key points from the Alabama Supreme Court's ruling and the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling. You are also responsible for reading the Federal ruling on your own.
---------------------------------------------------------
1/25/01
Freedom:
Prior Restraint
John
Milton’s Areopagitica 1644
“Marketplace
of Ideas”
Seditious
Libel
“The
greater the truth the greater the libel.”
1843
Truth as Libel defense
1735
Zenger trial. Truth as defense
1789
First Amendment
1798
Alien and Sedition Acts (but Truth as a defense)
1865
14th Amendment (p. 47)
1917
Espionage Act, 1918 Sedition Act
1919 Schenck. Holmes’ theater analogy
1969
Brandenburg v. Ohio (p. 55)
Ethics:
2000 Hill v. Colorado
---------------------------------------
1/30/01
Quiz
Subsequent
punishment v. prior restraint (p. 60)
Near
v. Minnesota (1931)
Judges split 5-4
Pentagon
Papers (1971)
Judges split 6-3
City
of Erie v. Pap’s A.M.
Judges split 7-2
Prepublication
review (Reagan, 1983)
Hate
speech
Flag
burning (p. 70-71)
Ethical
question: Jackson next class;
8-foot bubble, continued.
---------------------------------------
2/1/01
HOMEWORK DISCUSSED
LIBEL V. SLANDER
Who can sue? (p. 110)
RECENT CASES:
1999 FOOD LION V. CAPITAL CITIES (We’ll discuss this next week)
1988 Brown and Williamson Tobacco Co. v. Jacobson
1994 ABC’s Day One apology
Elements of Libel: Defamation, Dissemination, Identification, Fault, Proving Damages
Major Defenses: Truth, Privilege, and Fair Comment
118 (Truth: shifting burden from media to plaintiff)
130 Malice
Public v. Private
We'll discuss the above concepts, New York Times v. Sullivan, and Gertz v. Welch on Tuesday 2/6/01
------------------------------------
2/6
QUIZ
“Libel-proof”
Overview
of Libel
Elements of Libel: Defamation, Dissemination,
Identification, Fault, Proving Damages
Major Defenses: Truth, Privilege, and Fair Comment
Actual Malice: (130)
Masson v. New Yorker Magazine (141)
Veggie Libel laws (155) (handout: Oprah Winfrey)
Who is the plaintiff? Public v. Private
New York Times v. Sullivan
Gertz v. Welch
2/13 AND 2/15
Right
to privacy
“Right to be let alone” Louis D. Brandeis
Abortion rights? Protected.
Homosexual rights? Not protected.
Overview p. 172.
FIVE ELEMENTS OF PRIVACY VIOLATION
1. Intrusion upon plaintiff’s seclusion, solitude
173-4 Wilson v. Layne
175 Le Mistral Inc. v. CBS
177 Shulman v. Group W. Productions
2. Disclosure of Private Facts
183 Cox v. Cohn (naming rape victims allowed)
184 Smith v. Daily Mail (naming children allowed)
187 Newsworthy defense (Sports Illustrated)
ETHICAL QUESTION (FOOD LION CASE)
SHOULD
IT BE LAWFUL TO USE HIDDEN CAMERAS? IS
IT ETHICAL?
3. Publicity: False Light
190-191 Time v. Hill: Sullivan threshold
191 Cantrell v. Forest City Publishing Co.
4. Appropriation of name or likeness (misappropriation)
194 Carson v. Here’s Johnny
194 Sinatra v. Goodyear
195 Waits v. Frito-Lay
[Vanna] White v. Samsung
196 Wendt v. Host International
---------------------------------------
3/6/01
For the test, review Menand and Greenhouse
3/8/01
To review, reread Barlow and the relevant sections of Overbeck, including the length of copyright coverage (we mentioned, for example, that because the song, "Happy Birthday" is copyrighted until 2010, one must pay its copyright holders whenever singing the song for commercial purposes, including singing it at a restaurant; the copyright for this song expires in 2010).
We
also discussed how the Internet challenges the idea of copyright and property
and we discussed Barlow's points about this. I
talked, also, about Stephen King's novella, "The Plant," and the
challenges of dispersing a novel for free over the Web. Finally, we
discussed Amazon's copyright over its "one-click" system of purchasing
goods on its site.
3/13
Fair
trial-free press
O.j.
Simpson trial: TVs in courtroom, massive coverage
Rodney
King
P.
273: Sheppard v. Maxwell, 1954. Evidence
mounts in 1990s
Newsgatherer's
privilege
P. 305: Branzburg v. Hayes, 1972. Four justices: shield doesn’t count. Powell (swing): doesn’t apply here but should be balanced.
P.
324: Cohen v. Cowles, 1991.
3/15
Indecent
v. Obscene
p.
368: Hicklin Rule (1868)
p.
370: One Book Entitled ‘Ulysses’ v. U.S. (1934).
Abandoning Hicklin
p.
370: Roth v. U.S. (1957)
p.
372: Memoirs v. Massachusetts (1966)
p.
375: Miller v. California (1973)
p.
380: Child Pornography Prevention Act (1996)
p.
385: Communications Decency Act (1996)
p.
387: Child Online Protection Act (1998)
Justice
Potter Stewart: “I
know it when I see it.”
4/3, 4/5/, 4/10
To review this section reread your notes on the Frontline video, Bagdikian, and class lectures.
4/12
Student press issues |
|
p.
548. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
“black
armbands case”
p.
550 Papish v. University of Missouri Curators (1973)
cartoon
of policeman raping Statue of Liberty and Goddess of Justice
p.
550 Bazaar v. Fortune (1973)
University
can’t censor English Department publication
p.
552 de facto censorship: stealing
copies
p.
557 pre-Hazelwood cases:
Gambino v. Fairfax (1977)
Ruling
supports high school students reporting
on sexual activity
Williams
v. Spencer (1980)
p.
559 Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1985)
Review:
559, 560
p. 564-566 Private high schools and colleges: First Amendment generally not a defense.
Back to Mindich
Back to Media Law and Ethics
Back to Media Law and Ethics Schedule