Girls Gone Litigious
Via Overlawyered, a recent idiotic lawsuit:
In the latest development regarding suits by young women who come to regret being filmed in compromising states of undress during Spring Break, Mardi Gras, etc., a Denton County, Tex. jury has decided to award no damages to Brittany Lowry and Lezlie Fuller, who "accused Mantra Films of misappropriation and fraud after the two were videotaped in March 2002 flashing their breasts during a vacation at Panama City Beach, Fla."
This relates to a recent question of mine: whether it's legal to tape loud assholes shouting into their cell phones in coffee shops, stores, and in other public places. Whether it's safe to do so is another question. But, it seems, yes, it's legal, and regarding safety, it seems I don't have to let them know I'm doing it (like I would if I taped a phone call). I got this information from the "state-by-state guide" to taping, from the The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Here's California:
Cal. Penal Code §§ 631, 632: It is a crime in California to intercept or eavesdrop upon any confidential communication, including a telephone call or wire communication, without the consent of all parties.It is also a crime to disclose information obtained from such an interception. A first offense is punishable by a fine of up to $2,500 and imprisonment for no more than one year. Subsequent offenses carry a maximum fine of $10,000 and jail sentence of up to one year.
Eavesdropping upon or recording a conversation, whether by telephone (including cordless or cellular telephone) or in person, that a person would reasonably expect to be confined to the parties present, carries the same penalty as intercepting telephone or wire communications.
Here's the essential part, at least for me:
Conversations occurring at any public gathering that one should expect to be overheard, including any legislative, judicial or executive proceeding open to the public, are not covered by the law.
In other words, if you're shouting your private information into your phone at Starbucks, you may be shouting to the global village, if I have my way. The rest of the info from Reporters Committee for Freedom/California:
An appellate court has ruled that using a hidden video camera violates the statute. California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (1989). However, a television network that used a hidden camera to videotape a conversation that took place at a business lunch meeting on a crowded outdoor patio of a public restaurant that did not include "secret" information did not violate the Penal Code's prohibition against eavesdropping because it was not a "confidential communication." Wilkins v. NBC, Inc., 71 Cal. App. 4th 1066 (1999).Anyone injured by a violation of the wiretapping laws can recover civil damages of $5,000 or three times actual damages, whichever is greater. Cal. Penal Code § 637.2(a). A civil action for invasion of privacy also may be brought against the person who committed the violation. Cal. Penal Code § 637.2.
Whether I can publish a taped conversation -- the audiotape itself, not just the transcript -- on my blog is another question...hee hee...one I plan to research soon!
Seems like just another case of kids that can't take responsibility for their own actions.
As far as your idea- go for it. Not a court in the world could blame you.
Panama City Beach at July 18, 2006 12:43 PM
Leave a comment