News? Or A Violation Of Privacy?
from the questions-all-around dept
Two separate stories crossed my desk recently, that both raise some interesting questions in today's internet age. The first was concerned about whether or not a newspaper in South Carolina violated any laws in publishing emails between South Carolina governor Mark Sanford and his supposed mistress in Argentina. The second story involves blog network Gawker which apparently published the private profile of an 11-year-old boy who supposedly was "snubbed" by actress Megan Fox, when trying to deliver a flower to her.Both raise a lot of questions about definitions of "privacy" when it comes to today's socially networked and internet-connected world. It seems like there are numerous questions (and different jurisdictions and laws) that come into play in determining what is or is not a legal violation of privacy -- but if you're a lawyer who practices in this area, I would imagine that the next few years are going to be very busy ones. I'm not about to make a judgment call on either one at this point, but it would be fascinating for lawyers (and others) to chime in both on what they think from a legal standpoint and what they think from a "reasonable" standpoint.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: journalism, mark sanford, megan fox, privacy, reporting
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Privacy is dead
Anything can be filmed and recorded anywhere, anytime, if anyone is interested in doing so.
I find it hard to believe that this can be stopped.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Privacy is dead
The sky is falling
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Privacy is dead
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Privacy is dead
Clearly the governor should have spent a bit less time waxing poetic and more time investigating how to encrypt email using a 1024-bit key. Of course, that requires both parties to be equally paranoid conscientious
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Privacy or Copyright
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Privacy in Internet
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Privacy is dead
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Legal Framework
1. Public Disclosure of Private Facts
To establish this claim, one needs to generally prove:
a. The defendant publicized information about the plaintiff's private life;
b. The publicity would be highly offensive to a reasonable person;
c. The matter publicized is not of legitimate public concern; and
d. The plaintiff suffered an injury as a result of the defendant's disclosure.
2. Intrusion on Seclusion
The elements of this cause of action are, generaly:
a. The defendant intentionally intruded on the plaintiff's solitude, seclusion, or private affairs;
b. The intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person; and
c. The plaintiff suffered an injury as a result of the defendant's intrusion.
In the case of the Governor Sanford, since he is a public figure and adultery is against the law, the emails are most likely fair game because they would be considered "legitimate matters of public concern". That being said, there could still be a crime if the emails were unlawfully "intercepted" or if somebody hacked into his email account.
As for the 11 year old boy, publishing his private profile can certainly constitute both a public disclosure of private facts, as well as intrusion on seclusion.
My guess is, however, that Gawker had a clause in its terms of service in which the 11 year old boy "consented" to this type of disclosure. The fact that he is only 11 years old may raise an issue as to whether or not he can consent to such a disclosure...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Letters to the editor too
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No, that's not his claim to fame. That sort of stuff happens every day. His claim to fame is that someone video taped it and it went viral.
If the 11 year old boy had attempted to kill a celebrity, his personal profile might be newsworthy. But I see nothing that the public has a right to know relating to this complete non-incident.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The Legal Framework
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The second case does not seem to have broken any laws, although it makes me question Gawker's ethics. The article you linked to about the Governor's emails makes the point that "misplaced trust does not constitute a defense". The kid gave permission to his profile to someone else, who then forwarded on the content. I don't know anything about Facebook's policies for children and their friends, so there could be a violation of the TOS.
The minute you share any data, online or not, without some sort of legal protection like an NDA, there can be no expectation of complete privacy. I still can't understand why this seems to be beyond the comprehension of most people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Privacy Laws
Even so, I will point out that, while these are very important questions, there is not enough information to give a reasonable answer, and in the long run, "knee-jerk" reactions are far worse than not answering - so, no answer.
[ link to this | view in thread ]