statement must injure or diminish a person’s reputation
statement must be published
unlike slander
written
broadcast
statement must be false
Exemptions from Libel
qualified privilege
judicial or legislative hearings
public statements may be libelous
absolute privilege
court of law
attorneys may make accusatory statements
opinion
fair comment or criticism
public individuals
public officials
professional athletes
entertainers
must prove actual malice
Copyright
intellectual property
“fixed and tangible means of expression”
monopoly over publication (copy)
protects derivative works
“fair use”
borrow limited amounts of material
quote as part of a larger work
does not require payment/permission
music licensing
broadcasters pay royalties to composers
negotiated rate: blanket fee
licensing houses
American Society of Composers, Artists, and Publishers
Broadcast Music Incorporated
Society of European Stage Authors and Composers
do not pay performance rights
satellite and Internet radio
unfair position
composer royalties
performance royalties
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998)
anti-circumvention
protects Internet service providers for transmitting
infringing material
obligated ISPs to remove infringing material
requires Internet radio stations to pay recording royalties
peer-to-peer
file sharing
Napster (1999)
Grokster (2005)
Limewire (2010)
Invasion of Privacy
private facts
humiliation or shame
offensive to a person of “reasonable sensibilities”
newsworthiness of information
intrusion
invasion person’s seclusion or solitude without consent
trespass adds the physical invasion on private property
without permission
false light
presenting information in distorted way
information must be false
must prove actual malice
commercial exploitation
unauthorized use of a person
promotion of a commercial venture
written consent
right to publicity
Shield Laws
privilege from testifying in a court of law
no federal shield law
state by state
journalists protecting confidential sources
government can compel reporters to reveal sources
journalist has information that bears directly on the case
evidence cannot be obtain from any other source
evidence is crucial in the determination of the case
must strike a balance
freedom of press
duty of court to exercise justice
Obscenity
Miller v. California (1973)
Whether “the average person, applying contemporary community
standards”, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals
to the prurient interest
Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way,
sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law
Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary,
artistic, political or scientific value
Federal Communications Commission
Federal Radio Act 1927
Federal Communications Act 1933
Five Commissioners
appointed by president
confirmed by senate
no more than three from each political party
roles
grants licenses
makes policies
enforces regulations
renews or denies licenses
does not directly govern cable, satellite, or Internet
Equal Opportunity
Section 315
“If any licensee shall permit any person who is a legally
qualified candidate for any public office to use a
broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to
all other such candidates for that office in the use of such
broadcast station”
legally qualified candidate for public office
publicly announced intention to run for office
legally qualified for the office
initiated steps to qualify for the ballot or write-in
candidates must request equal opportunity
equal time
equal rates
must oppose each other
“use” of a broadcasting facility
voice or picture
program or commercial spot
exemptions to Section 315
bona fide newscasts
bona fide news interviews
appearance is incidental
on-the spot news coverage
Profanity
irreverent or blasphemous use of God
divine condemnation as to constitute a public nuissance
“God will damn you”
Indecency
depicts or describes sexual or excretory organs or activities in
terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community
standards for the broadcast medium. In each case, the FCC must
determine whether the material describes or depicts sexual or
excretory organs or activities and, if so, whether the material
is “patently offensive.”