Time Inc. v. Hill
From Personality Rights Database
|
| United States |
Contents |
[edit] 1 Time, Inc. v. Hill
Case Name: Time, Inc. v. Hill
Key Words: Libel; Press articles and “fictonalization” of facts; due standard of journalistic research
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Country: US
Citation: 385 U.S. 374
Date: Jan. 9, 1967
Case No.: No. 22
Importance: Individual States in the US can make laws in order to protect individuals against incorrect press reports. They can also make laws that grant damages as compensation for unauthorized use of the name and portrait of an individual in a fictional, as opposed to newsworthy, context. The standard of journalistic research, however, may not be exaggerated: Only incorrect publications that are knowingly false or are made in reckless disregard of the truth can be made subject to compensation under the 1st Amendment.
Facts: Hill and his family were held hostage in Pennsylvania by a gang of convicts. They were released without further harm being done to them. An author, Hayes, was inspired by this story and by other facts to write a novel “The Desperate Hours”. In this fictional story severe harm was done to the victims. A theatre director, Montgomery, transformed the book into a play. Life, a Time Inc. publication, reported on the play. They referred to the play as a re-enactment of the Hill incident and filmed pictures to be included in the play that were staged at the former house of the Hill family. Hill never wanted any publicity and claimed that this incorrect connection between the play and the incident gave him a cause of action under a 1903 New York Statute. In that Statute §51 provides that damages can be awarded to claimants whose portrait has been used without authorisation for purposes of advertising and trade unless accompanied by newsworthy reporting.
[edit] 2 Decision and Reasoning
The case illustrates the tension between the freedom of the Press under the 1st Amendment and the laws of privacy as they have emerged since the Warren / Brandeis article in 4 Harvard Law Review 193 (1890).
The New York statute came about as a result of the Warren Brandeis Article and of the 1902 *Roberson v Rochester Folding Box Co 172 NY 538, 64 N. E. 442 case, where a company had used the picture of another person to decorate their flour bags. Since that time the name and portrait of a person enjoy special protection. There are, however, exceptions such as for press reporting. Fictitious reports or articles may lead to damages as may the use of portrait or name for advertising.
According to Justice Brennan, the New York Statute is constitutional. He excluded untrue facts from the scope of the Constitution. However, to his mind the interpretation of the Statute by the New York courts went beyond the constitutional limits. The majority of the court in the instant case considered that minor faults and inaccuracies in press reports also have to be accepted in order to guarantee freedom of the press. Therefore only statements that are “false or in reckless disregard of the truth” can result in an award of damages. The press thus enjoys a wide protection which in turn helps to ensure that it will not need to take self restraining measures.
The approach of the majority seeks a middle path between a position that favours the freedom of the press at the expense of individual rights, and one that favours individual rights over press freedom.
| List of States |
|---|
|
Argentina · Australia · Canada · France · Germany · Mexico · South Africa · Spain · United Kingdom · United States |
| United States | ||
|---|---|---|
| Federal | US Federal law | |
| States | Alabama | Alaska | Arizona | Arkansas | California | Colorado | Connecticut | Delaware | Florida | Georgia | Hawaii | Idaho | Illinois | Indiana | Iowa | Kansas | Kentucky | Louisiana | Maine | Maryland | Massachusetts | Michigan | Minnesota | Mississippi | Missouri | Montana | Nebraska | Nevada | New Hampshire | New Jersey | New Mexico | New York | North Carolina | North Dakota | Ohio | Oklahoma | Oregon | Pennsylvania | Rhode Island | South Carolina | South Dakota | Tennessee | Texas | Utah | Vermont | Virginia | Washington | West Virginia | Wisconsin | Wyoming | |
