With certain ‘private’ home videos (Pamela Lee, for example) going public, I was wondering about the laws regarding such vids.
If a guy takes his girlfriend home, and then films the 2 of them having sex (with consent), and then the couple break up, does the man have the right to do with that video whatever he pleases? Can he sell it? Can the woman go to court to get it destroyed?
“Can he sell it? Can the woman
go to court to get it destroyed?”
Yes. Yes.
Standard IANAL disclaimer on this, but like anything else, I’m sure you would have to show damages and/ or defamation from the video. It’s a good question because I know this comes up. In fact, I vaguely remember this being a case on the TV show LA Law years ago, which was the same deal, but the woman became famous and the ex-husband wanted to damage her image with the home-porn.
As a slight hijack, I’d be curious to hear whether the woman would be able to sue if, say, the ex had released the video years ago, and then she happens to find out about it ten years later. At that point it would have been distributed to the far corner of the planet, and it might be harder to argue that it has somehow affected her career, job opportunities, image, etc. At that point, I’d think at best she might be able to sue for any profits the movie had made. Any lawyers out there have an opinion on this? Bricker maybe?
The people who sold the Lee/Anderson video were able to do it legally by using an obscure “public domain” statute. Don’t have a clue what the exact reasoning was, but I do know that Poison’s Bret Michaels later made a similar sex video, but was able to block its release by copyrighting it.
My WAG is that it’s different for celebrities than it would be for private individuals. But that is a major WAG and I might be wrong…
Law follows morality and few would not agree that this is a dispicable act. One can imagine actions under various heads from invasion of privacy to intentional infliction of emotional distress. Judges would generally be sympathetic in granting injunctive relief in such cases though in reality the damage is usually too late to contain.
The PLA case was odd and relied IIRC to some extent on the numerous statements and interviews by PLA regarding specifics of the video demonstrated a lack of concern for privacy on her part.
Let me ask a question of the OP.
Did the woman sign a standard model release before making the video?
Obviously not Doug.
Do you think that releases are always necessary? Or do they merely provide for certainty?
It doesn’t matter what I think. Just asking questions.
For the sake of the question, Doug, nothing would be signed before the “filming” took place.
It’s easy. One just compares how much they could make selling it Vs. what the party would get if they got sued. For the Pamela thing, they could make much more money.