Document Sample
group Powered By Docstoc
					       Chapter 2: Is the Right To
           Privacy Threatened?

Banana Slug’s : Civil Liberties Class
                          Bryce Kirchhausen
                             Jessica Fischer
                                Emily Engel
     Loss of Privacy Harms Society

  “The right to privacy is essential to the
  preservation of freedom.”
Joseph S. Fulda

                                          Viewpoint 2
                                  Our Main Points
• A government that is not        • Invasion of privacy is
  aware of what a person is         seldom recorded as
  doing or thinking can not         criminal.
  take advantage of his           • When privacy is
  rights.                           constantly invaded people
• Without privacy, freedom          become immune to a lack
  can not be preserved.             of privacy.
• Without the right to            • Monitored people are
  privacy, there is no liberty.     more self-conscious and
                                    careful with their actions.
                  Government Awareness
1) If I am having a conversation with my friend about my
   feelings on President Clinton, I should be able to say what
   I want in the privacy of my own home and not worry about
   legal complications.
2) As Americans the First Amendment allows us the right to
   talk on the phone and not worry about who is listening.
     Without Privacy, Freedom Can
                 Not be Conserved
If I want to walk around my house in my bathing suit
   and then dance the Polka until three o’clock in the
   morning I am allowed to do that.
• If I want to close the blinds and not let anyone see, that’s my
• If I choose to keep the blinds open and show the neighborhood then I
  should be allowed to do that also.
The government interfering with my decision of keeping my
  blinds open or closed is an invasion of privacy.
  Privacy Rights Are Not Listed in
                  the Constitution
• The awareness of peoples right to privacy is slowly
• If the people’s right to privacy is not constantly reminded
   they tend to forget that they exist.
-Humans need to be reminded things.
For example:
If men aren’t reminded to place the toilet seat down then they
   usually won’t remember to put it down.
• Without the courts fining and restricting people then the
   issue of privacy may not be respected.
When privacy is invaded it hardly
         is recorded as criminal
• Some people believe that one is allowed to invade others
    privacy if that privacy is not expected.
-Privacy should always be expected.
-It should not have to be reminded over and over.

• Example:
When I am in the shower I expect my roommate to not come
  in even though the door is not locked.
                 Positive Feedback Loop
• When privacy is constantly invaded the less it is expected.

• When the government constantly asks for personal
  information due to taxes, our liberty is destructed.
-This tax related information creates unwanted programs like
  population control programs.
-The government wants to make National I.D. Cards which
  tell medical information, social security information, and
  other unwanted personal information.
                             Compliance 2000
• The IRS is making a huge database with every American’s
  personal information.

• This database is exempt from notification, access, and
  content provisions of the Private Act (1974).

• The IRS doesn’t need permission to obtain this
                                   The Observed
• Monitored people are more self-conscious and careful with
  their actions.
-When one walks into a store or elevator and sees a security
  camera they are more apt to either make faces or act
  rigidly, either way they act differently because they know
  they are being watched.
More Laws Are Not Needed to
            Protect Privacy

 “Every state already provides civil remedies for
    those who believe their privacy has been

Jane E. Kirtley                         Viewpoint 4
           Our Main Points

Three Arguements Against Making More Privacy Laws.

                           First Point
       There are already many laws that can protect privacy.

                          Second Point
                    Success with current laws.

                           Third Point
         Celebrities and Newsworthiness/Newsgathering
 Current Laws Protecting Privacy
• Thomas Cooley, a justice, acknowledged the right to
   privacy as a right “to be let alone” in his treatise on torts.
A) Appropriation
B) False Light
C) Public Disclosure of Private Facts
D) Intrusion
• Trespass Laws
• Stalking Laws
• Copyright
               Appropriation of Name or
• recognizes an individual’s inherent property right in
  controlling the use of his name or likeness.

• One who gives publicity to a matter concerning the private
  life of another is subject to liability for invasion of privacy
  if the matter is highly offensive to a reasonable person and
  is not of legitimate concern to the public.
                     False Light

• an invasion of privacy is recognized when information
  publicized as truthful when it is not correct.

• this tort can create a strong cause of action against tabloid
  journalism and encourages accuracy in reporting.

• One is subject to invasion of privacy if he gives publicity
  to a matter concerning another that places them before the
  public in false light.
               Intrusion Upon Seclusion
• One who intentionally intrudes upon the solitude or
  seclusion of another or his private affairs or concerns is
  subject to liability to the other for invasion of privacy.

• Galella vs. Onassis is a good example

• Another example is the privacy of politicians. The public
  policy rationale is that the way an individual handles his
  personal life is a representation of his character and
  judgment, which is important to the public in determining
  who they wish to represent their interests.
                                  Trespass Laws
• These laws protect individuals including celebrities
  against invasions of privacy while on private property.
                                  Copyright Laws
• Protects celebrities’ interests under the right of publicity
  against the unauthorized use by the media of images
  owned by the celebrity.

• Protects celebrities from losing the value they have in their
  images that have been fixed by prohibiting the
  unconscented use of such images.
                                   Stalking Laws
• These laws prevent obsessive surveillance of celebrities
                           State Regulations
• New York and California provide the most extensive
  regulations for protecting privacy interests.
                                 Success Stories
• Gallela vs. Onassis: Intrusion Upon Seclusion.

• Clint Eastwood vs. National Enquirer: False Light.

• Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio vs. Playgirl: Publicity of
      Private Facts.
                              Gallela vs. Onassis
• The court ruled that interference by the press in the
  privacy of the individual can “be no greater than
  necessary to protect the overriding public interest.
• Information was not essential.
• The court considered the right of privacy.
• Gallela interfered and endangered them.
• The court considered continued surveillance.
• Gallela would have continued his pursuit of Ms. Onassis.
   Eastwood vs. National Enquirer
• Eastwood was accused of being in a love triangle with
  Tanya Tucker.

• Ordinarily, “the purported romantic involvement of
  Eastwood with other celebrities…is a matter of public
  concern, which would generally preclude the imposition of

• However, the article was found false.
      Pitt and DiCaprio vs. Playgirl
• The two succeeded in actions against Playgirl on the
  grounds of Publicity of Private Facts.

• Brad Pitt prevented further distribution.

• Leonardo DiCaprio received a settlement.
                  Celebrities and
• Celebrities are entitled to the same general right of privacy
  that extends to all individuals.

• Articles recounting details of the daily lives of celebrities
  is of much more interest then the same stories concerning
  an unknown person.

• There are three rationales for providing a smaller degree of
  protection toward celebrities or public persons in general.
                       Protection Rationale
• 1. Most public persons       • 3. The press has the right
  seek and consent to            to inform the public about
  publicity, striving for        matters of public interest.
  worldwide recognition.       -Celebrities “create audience
-Politicians also take           appeal not only through
  advantage of the press         the substantive
  seeking higher positions.      achievements that bring
• 2. The personalities and       him fame, but at the
  affairs of celebrities are     expense of privacy that he
  viewed as “public” due to      must surrender in be-
  the nature of their jobs.      coming a public person.”
      • There is no need for
        new legislation
        because the press
        should regulate and set
        their own standards
        rather then risk having
        their rights severely
        limited by the courts.
        Random Drug Tests Do Not
      Violate the Privacy of Athletes

“Students who voluntarily participate in school
  athletics have reason to expect intrusions upon
  normal rights and privileges including privacy.”

Antonin Scalia et al.
                                             Viewpoint 5
                       Our Main Topics

•   The Supreme Court
•   Drug Problems in Schools
•   The Random Drug Tests
•   Lawsuit
•   Fourth Amendment
•   Personal View of a Student-Athlete
                          The Supreme Court
• Antonin Scalia, Justice of The Supreme Court, contends
  that student athletes are subject to more regulations than
  other students and should not expect the same level of

• Random drug tests given to student athletes do not violate
  their right to privacy.
             Drug Problems in Schools
• Our Nation is having an increase in the usage of drugs in

• Many athletes turn to these drugs to increase performance
  and for pleasure.

• Drug use by students/athletes is out of hand in schools and
  should be controlled by tests and laws.
                   The Random Drug Test
• All students athletes in the NCAA must sign a consent
  form plus have a written consent from their parent.

• Once a week during a season the names of athletes are
  placed in a pool from which a name is blindly drawn.
  Those drawn must test that day. The athlete is monitored
  during the test. The samples are then tested.

• If positive...
                                Positive Results
• 1st Offense:
  -Option One: Go to support program for 6 weeks and
  weekly urine tests.
  -Option Two: Suspended for the rest of the current season
  and next season.
• 2nd Offense:
  -Suspended for the rest of the current season and next
• 3rd Offense:
  -Must sit out the rest of current season and next two.
                                          The Lawsuit
• In 1991, a 7th grader from an intermediate school in
  Oregon refused to take a drug test in order to play football,
  which led to a lawsuit. He was denied participation.

•   His family filed suit saying that it violated his 4th and
    14th Amendment rights of the U.S. Constitution and
    Article 9 in the Oregon Constitution.

• The U.S. court ruled that his family was correct.

• Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and
  seizures and requires probable cause as a condition
  precedent to the issuance of a search warrant.
                                           Personal View
• As a NCAA Student Athlete I had to sign the consent forms for the
  drug testing. I don’t have a problem with these tests at all and I don’t
  think they violate my privacy. I knew before I came here that there
  were going to be tests, they just go along with the job. If any student
  athletes don’t want to take the tests then they shouldn’t be an NCAA
  Athlete. At this level of sport we are looked at as role models. We
  have a responsibility to perform well in class, on the field and to be
  role models to our peers, doing drugs is no way of achieving any of
  these goals.
       Wiretaps Violate the Right to

“According to the U.S. Supreme Court each and
  every electronic intercept constitutes a search and
  seizure under the Fourth Amendment.”

Laura W. Murphy

                                               Viewpoint 7
                    Our Main Points

• Fourth Amendment Violation

• Specific Cases

• New Technology

• Legislation
        Fourth Amendment Violation
• This Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and
  seizures and requires probable cause as a condition
  precedent to the issuance of a search warrant.
• The American Civil Liberties Union is an organization that
  defends civil rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
• Each and every electronic intercept constitutes a search
  and seizure under the Fourth Amendment.
• Nearly two-million in 1994 were intercepted by Federal
  and local law enforcement wiretaps.
                            Specific Cases

• Flanagan v. Epson America Incorporated.

• Smyth v. Pillsbury Company.
  Flanagan v. Epson America Inc.
• Employees filed a civil class action suit against the
  company for invasion of privacy.

• The employees claimed that the company bypassed their
  passwords and read and printed all of their e-mail
  messages entering or leaving the company system.

• The court rejected the company’s claim that the Electronic
  Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) preempted the
  employees state constitution based privacy claim.
         Smyth v. Pillsbury Company
• Smyth was an employee at the company.
• The company maintained an e-mail system to promote an
  internal corporate communications between employees.
• Pillsbury repeatedly assured the employees that no
  communications would be intercepted and that they would
  remain confidential.
• Smyth was fired due to unprofessional comments over the
  companies e-mail system.
• The court favored Pillsbury, noting that Smyth couldn’t
  have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
                                New Technology
• New technology and more surveillance will lead to less

• Past 11 years:
- .2% of wiretaps were used for the investigation of terrorists.
- 83% were used for gambling and drugs.

• FBI claims that wiretaps are being used for legitimate
  surveillance while in fact they are not.
• Congress passed legislation that endorsed the radical
   notion that the government could require an entire industry
   to alter its technology so the government could continue to
• This was the first time in our history that this has
• Employers try to protect themselves by claiming that their
   employees have consented to the wiretapping and
   observations because they were notified.
- Notification does not necessarily mean consent.

Shared By:
fanzhongqing fanzhongqing http://