Posts Tagged ‘privacy’

Iowa Husbands: Knock Before Opening the Bathroom Door

The Iowa Supreme Court has held that a wife can suffer an invasion of privacy in her home, even from her husband, according to this Associated Press story.  Inconsiderate husbands and wives in the Hawkeye State shouldn’t make too much of this holding, which can probably be limited to its bizarre facts.  Upholding a trial court’s award of $22,500 in damages, Iowa’s high court held that Cathy Tigges had a cause of action for invasion of privacy against her husband, Jeffrey Tigges, who placed multiple hidden cameras in the couple’s bedroom.  Necessarily, the Court held that Mrs. Tigges did have a reasonable expectation of privacy from her husband in her marital bedroom, particularly when she thought she was alone.

For the nosey among us, neither the story nor the Court’s opinion reveals Mr. Tigges’ reason for placing the cameras, but one assumes he feared he was being cuckolded.  Whether that was true or not, the Tiggses, who appear to have been a pair of amateur spymasters (each secretly recorded the other’s telephone conversations as well), have also been granted what sounds like a long overdue divorce.

Despite their concerns about privacy, the Tiggeses have succeeded in making their unhappy marriage a worldwide public spectacle, which I am doing my part to promote.  That’s the funny thing about defamation and privacy lawsuits; in a society that values open courts, one often broadcasts the injury to a far larger audience by taking it to litigation.  Thanks to How Appealing for the pointer.

Members of client class filed $6.1 million in claims…

…and the judge hearing an attorneys’-fee petition in the TJX credit-card data-breach case reasoned that the lawyers didn’t really deserve $6.5 million in fees for achieving that result. The lawyers proposed, but the judge was unimpressed with, a theory that their suit had “made available” $200 million to the class, even if few class members stopped by to pick it up. Such sticklers, these judges can be. (Beck and Herrmann, Nov. 11). Related: Dec. 4, 2007.

Professor fired for blog post charging students with plagiarism

Adjunct Loye Young at Texas A&M International University in Laredo had named and shamed students he said he had caught submitting essays not their own. The university “is paraphrased as stating that the professor ‘was terminated for violating the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, a federal law that prohibits the release of students’ educational records without consent.'” (Eugene Volokh, Nov. 18; Paul Caron, TaxProf, Nov. 18).

By reader acclaim: “Nude Photos on Lost Cell Phone Lead to Suit”

“Here’s some food for thought: If you have nude photos of your wife on your cell phone, hang onto it. Phillip Sherman of Arkansas learned that lesson after he left his phone behind at a McDonald’s restaurant and the photos ended up online.” Sherman says restaurant employees had promised to secure the phone until he returned to pick it up; the story does not make clear (assuming it is known at all) how or by whom the pictures were posted. He and Tina Sherman are now suing the restaurant for damages that include the cost of moving to a new house, saying that she received threatening and harassing text and voice messages related to the pictures. (AP, Nov. 23; Northwest Arkansas Times).

Update: Florida Supreme Court rejects “false light” theory

The Florida high court has rejected the invasion-of-privacy tort theory under which a defendant can be held liable for a publication setting forth individually true facts which collectively create a misleading impression. We’ve extensively covered one of the two lawsuits on which the court ruled, in which famed attorney Willie Gary obtained an $18 million jury verdict against Gannett for investigative journalism it perpetrated against one of his clients. An appeals court later threw out the verdict. (WSJ law blog, Pensacola News-Journal, St. Petersburg Times editorial).

However, Marc Randazza at Citizen Media Law Blog (Oct. 24), analyzing the second of the two Florida cases, Rapp v. Jews for Jesus, warns that the decisions fell far short of being the free speech victories some have taken them as, because the Florida court endorsed and strengthened theories of “defamation by implication” which will usually be available in suing over the same fact patterns, the difference being that suits alleging “defamation by implication” must overcome more robust First Amendment defenses. Similarly: Elizabeth Spainhour, Newsroom Law Blog, Oct. 24.

Nevada data encryption law

On October 1 a new law went into effect in Nevada requiring businesses to encrypt all “personal identifying information” (things like Social Security and drivers’ license numbers and credit card numbers) of customers in email and “electronic transmissions” more generally. The law has raised concern among, e.g., law offices and medical providers which often work with client documents containing such numbers; it will now be unlawful (say) to email such documents from a professional’s workplace to his or her home office absent encryption. Howard Marks at Information Week (Oct. 13):

Electronic transmission isn’t defined, so one interpretation would include the telephone — so if you forget the password to your online banking account, your bank will have to snail mail or fax you a new one. It does say “to a person outside of the secure system of the business,” so you don’t have to run out and encrypt all your disks like the vendor that brought this to my attention would like.

Don Sears at Baseline (Sept. 19) cites a Las Vegas lawyer on such problems with the law as “the lack of coordination with industry standards and the unclear nature of penalties both criminal and civil” and concludes “once again, the legal system and the IT industry are faced with potentially bigger compliance and liability issues than they probably intended.” At Davis Wright Tremaine’s Privacy and Security Law Blog (Feb. 27), Randy Gainer cites similar (but not identical) mandates moving forward in other states and also notes, “the overwhelming majority of reports of stolen and lost consumer data relate to stored data, not data in transit…. The limited, data-in-transit, encryption mandate in the Nevada statute will therefore do little to stem the tide of stolen and lost consumer data.” Marian Waldmann at Morrison & Foerster (Oct. 2007) notes California’s more sweeping but less specific mandate for businesses to implement and maintain “reasonable security procedures and practices”, and also points out that the determination of whether an out-of-state entity dealing with Nevada residents is “doing business” in the state, and therefore subject to legal mandates of this sort, has been described by the Nevada Supreme Court itself as “often a laborious, fact-intensive inquiry resolved on a case-by-case basis” in litigation. Other commentary: Sidley Austin, Lori MacVittie/DevCentral.

Cavorter’s remorse, cont’d: topless mermaid suit case

Spot the antecedent of “her” in this lead paragraph from SixShot.com:

A New York judge yesterday (September 22) dismissed a lawsuit filed against Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs and Vibe Magazine over a picture that showed her topless at a party hosted by the Bad Boy mogul.

It reads as if “her” would have to refer to “judge”, but not so: it was hedge fund manager Maria Kristina Dominguez who sued the magazine and music celebrity. The judge threw out her suit, ruling that the “photo was related to newsworthy issues of public interest and Dominguez had no right of privacy while cavorting topless”. More on flasher’s remorse here, etc.

Claim: Spitzer’s floozy used my lost ID

New Jersey dental assistant Amber Arpaio found herself an asterisk-to-an-asterisk in the history of political scandals when it was reported that Ashley Dupre used Arpaio’s lost driver’s license to pass for more than 17 when she made a “Girls Gone Wild” video that later became notorious after the exposure of Dupre’s paid liaison with Gov. Eliot Spitzer. So now Arpaio is suing Dupre and Joe Francis, impresario of the “Girls Gone Wild” series. The news coverage of the lawsuit contains no indication that Arpaio suffered any damage to her credit record or other tangible interests from the affair, but she wants upwards of $10 million in cash solace for defamation and invasion of privacy, and, per her attorney, because “when someone searches her name on the Internet, pornographic material comes up.” Much better, when someone searches her name on the Internet, for intimations of litigiousness to come up. (Nancy Dillon, “Duped by Dupre: N.J. woman charges Spitzer call girl with identity theft”, New York Daily News, Jul. 17; AP/Comcast, Jul. 17)(& Prettier Than Napoleon). Plus: complaint at The Smoking Gun (h/t commenter VMS).

More 7/22: Thanks to commenter Eric Turkewitz for pointing out that Dupre had posed as Arpaio in actual news coverage, not just in the signing of film releases and the like, which makes the basis for the suit less unreasonable than I had hastily assumed.

“The Naked Cowboy versus The Blue M&M”

In a 23-page opinion, Judge Denny Chin of the Southern District of New York ruled yesterday that confectioner Mars inc. did not violate the right of publicity of well-known Times Square entertainer Robert Burck, AKA the Naked Cowboy.

Mars had run a billboard video of its iconic M&M cartoon character in a variety of NY-centric contexts, including one scene in which the character was “wearing only a white cowboy hat, cowboy boots, and underpants, and carrying a guitar–Burck’s regular get-up.

New York’s publicity law (Sections 50 and 51 of the state’s Civil Rights Code) is among the most stringent in the nation, applying to “any recognizable likeness” of a person used in a commercial context, making the win an especially sweet one for Mars. An M&M in underpants and cowboy hat, said the court, was simply not a depiction of Burck.

The court, however, refused to render summary judgment on the Naked Cowboy’s Lanham Act claim of false endorsement, on the grounds that passers-by might confuse the M&M video for the Cowboy’s (somewhat dubious?) endorsement. (Earlier coverage).