Reputation, Celebrity and Defamation Law - Essay Example

Evolution The first issue in this context is that of copyright. Copyright refers to a limited legal right that grants the creator ofan original work exclusive use and control to the material of their creation. Copyright prohibits the use and distribution of copyrighted materials to a given extent, thus, allowing the creator to enjoy gratifications that come with their work. Copyright can protect any expressible form of an idea or information that is substantive and distinct (Rolph, 2). There are only two situations under which copyrighted materials can be used. These are through seeking and obtaining the full permission of the creator, referred to as the rights holder, and strictly adhering to the conditions under which permission is granted. The second and most widely used instance is fair use. The extent to which copyrighted material can be used is dependent on the various elements of fair use. Fair use however must be attributed to the original creator of the original material. Fair use is determined on four main grounds. First, fair use is determined by the purpose and manner of use of a copyrighted material. The reason that applies here is use non-profit or educational purposes. It is legally acceptable to use copyrighted for the reason of advancing knowledge or and advancement of the art by adding substantive new information in a way that completely distinguishes it from the original state and should generally be for the enrichment of the general public. There should be a sense of transformation to the new material and not merely a matter of derivation(Rolph, 45). Secondly, fair use applies when the item used is that which is in public domain, ideas among others. It should therefore be noted that copyright only protects the form, manner and style with which an idea is expressed and not the actual idea.Fair use is also justifiable on basis of the amount and substantiality. This basically encompasses the quantity and percentage of the copyrighted material has been adopted into the new work. A court of law would however determine the substance of the information needed to constitute infringement of copyright. Finally, fair use is determined on basis of the implications of the price of the original material in light development of the new one. As such, use of copyrighted material should be approached with care not to adversely affect the market situation of the original one, specifically the price. Most jurisdictions in the world generally treat copyright infringement as a civil crime, where all the aforementioned reasons for breach are considered. However, matters that are specifically not of public interest, especially those involving publication of state secrets, are considered criminal. The second issue in this context is the contention pertaining to defamation. Defamation refers to communication of false or malicious information that harms the reputation of an individual. In this specific case, the actual form of defamation is libel, which is generally refers to defamation by media of print, publication, picture or other non-spoken medium.There are fundamental conditions that set the threshold to constitute defamation in most jurisdictions. In order to sue for libel, the plaintiff has to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt, all the elements that constitute libel. First, they must prove that the libellous material has been communicated to a third part, in this case by way of publication. Secondly, they must prove that the information was intentionally published on basis of falsehood, utter disregard of the truth or without adequate research to ascertain its truthfulness. Lastly, the plaintiff must conclusively demonstrate harm caused by the publication of such information. They should explicitly elaborate how, by virtue of the published information, their livelihood, association, standing in society as well as their public image, have been brought to jeopardy and disrepute. Since defamation is either direct or referred, the plaintiff must also be able to demonstrate that they are the target of the defamatory information. In the case of referred defamation, they must demonstrate how the insinuations made leave no doubt that they are the subject targeted and any logical interpretation of the informationwould narrow down to them as the specific target. If proven beyond doubt, the offence of defamation is punished differently by different by different jurisdictions. While some jurisdictions consider defamation as a civil crime in most jurisdictions, others consider it criminal. Punishment for defamation varies on a case to case basis, ranging from out of court settlement, issuance of an order to withdraw and apologise, tough financial burdens or even complete closure of media outlets. There are however various defences that a journalist can invoke to counter defamation suit. The most prominent defence in defamation cases is truth. Truth is an absolute defence. The defendant has to prove that what is published, although not agreeable to the plaintiff, is actually a true account. Other defences should however be invoked if the information in contention cannot be proven as either true or false. It should however be noted that cases that involve state secrets, statements construed to harm public peace and security and those involving breach of privacy are basically criminal in nature and invoking truth as defence is null and void. Another defence for defamation is privilege. Privilege provides a temporary and situational shield against defamation suits provided preconditions for privilege are completely satisfied. A privilege is a situation that vindicates or rationalizes a technical and obvious offense. There are two forms of privileges in defamation. The first is absolute privilege. Such a privilege is a comprehensive bar to whoever enjoys it even if the defamatory remarks were made with malicious intentions. A classical example is what is referred to as parliamentary privilege in most commonwealth countries to protect legislative sessions. Statements in court proceedings are also considered to enjoy absolute privileges although judges can intervene as deemed necessary. The other form is qualified privilege. This form of privilege can be invoked as defence in situations where it is imperative that the facts be known for the public interest value they possess. Examples of situations that can be exploited to give qualified privilege include public meetings, press conferences and releases, among others Fair comment made in public interest is also considered defence against defamation suits. Statements made with an honest belief in their soundness. There should also be a series of situations upon which a reasonable analysis can be made to arrive at a logical conclusion as the statement being contested. This ground would similarly stand if a logical observer would likely consider and entertain the opinion, even if the assertion is not logically sound. In most commonwealth states, opinions are considered defence against defamation suits. This is however subject to the condition that those opinions are inherently expressed as opinions and not represented as facts. These jurisdictions are of the interpretation that opinions are primarily unjustifiable. The United States, however, is one of the few jurisdictions that don’t have the legal distinction between facts and opinions hence, other possibilities must be brought on board for defence. Innocent dissemination can be used as defence. The defendant must however prove that they had no prior knowledge of the actual defamatory information and had no reason to believe the information was defamatory as long as they can demonstrate that the ignorance of these facts was not a consequence of negligence. The reputation of the plaintiff can also be manipulated as defence against defamation suits. This is subject to proof by the defendant that the plaintiff arouses such a low public opinion, questionable character and negligible moral direction to an extent that defamation could do them no further harm. In the event that the information is so largely ignored by the public to an extent there is no evidence of any notable harm, public enquiry into the claims, public interest and the claim is not believed by public, the defendant can argue no damage caused as defence. Statute of limitation is a viable option when applicable. There is a stipulated duration within which an individual can seek legal redress on possible defamation. This duration may vary from state to state but when disseminated on mass media, it begins on the date of publication. When this duration elapses, the complainant has no legal grounds to sue for defamation. Reference Rolph, D.,( 2008).Reputation, Celebrity and Defamation Law.n.a :Ashgate Publishers Read More