What is the evidence
Hugo Zacchini performed a “human cannonball” act, a Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. free-lance reporter record the event, which aired on the news. Zacchini sued.
Extrinsic evidence
– Members of the public attending the fair were not charged a separate admission fee to observe his act
-the performance was invented by is father and only was preformed by his family for the last fifty years
What is the issue
Does the First and Fourteenth Amendments give the Defendant the right to broadcast Plaintiff’s entire stunt without compensation?
What is the precedent
Time, Inc. v. Hill : The Court explained that absent a finding of such malicious intent on the part of a publisher, press statements are protected under the First Amendment even if they are otherwise false or inaccurate. (Oyez.org)
How does my evidence fit the precedent
– There was no malicious intent in the broadcast
What is the conclusion
The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the state court’s decision that the Scripps-Howard infringed on a common copyright law. The Ohio Supreme Court stated that Scripps-Howard is constitutionally privileged to include in its newscasts matters of public interest that would otherwise be protected by the right of publicity, absent an intent to injure or to appropriate for some nonprivileged purpose.
“…..we are quite sure that the First and Fourteenth Amendments do not immunize the media when they broadcast a performer’s entire act without his consent.”
Because the performance was free with admission to the fair grounds, I do not have an ethical problem with it getting shown on TV, especially due to the kind words spoken about the event. I agree with the courts on this case.
I used JUSTIA as well