<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="0.91">
 <channel>
  <title>The Oyez Project: First Amendment Issues - Libel, Privacy</title>
  <link>http://www.oyez.org/issues/first-amendment/libel-privacy/</link>
  <description>U.S. Supreme Court Cases, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org)</description>
  <language>en-us</language>
  
   <item>
    <title>Bartnicki v. Vopper</title>
    <description>&lt;p&gt;An unidentified person intercepted and recorded a phone call between the chief union negotiator and the union president (the petitioners) during collective-bargaining negotiations involving a teachers' union and the local school board. After a teacher-favorable proposal was accepted, a radio commentator played a tape of the intercepted conversation. Petitioners filed suit under both federal and state wiretapping laws, alleging that an unknown person using an electronic device had surreptitiously intercepted their telephone conversation. Rejecting a First Amendment protection defense, the District Court concluded, in part, that the statutes were content-neutral laws of general applicability containing "no indicia of prior restraint or the chilling of free speech." Ultimately, the Court of Appeals found the statutes invalid because they deterred significantly more speech than necessary to protect the private interests at stake.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_99_1687/</link>
   </item>
  
   <item>
    <title>Cantrell v. Forest City Publishing Co.</title>
    <description>&lt;p&gt;No details yet.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1974/1974_73_5520/</link>
   </item>
  
   <item>
    <title>Cox Broadcasting Corporation v. Cohn</title>
    <description>&lt;p&gt;Martin Cohn was the father of a seventeen-year old girl who was raped and killed in Georgia. After obtaining information from the public record, a television station broadcast the name of Cohn's daughter in connection with the incident. This violated a Georgia privacy statute which prevented members of the media from publicizing the names or identities of rape victims.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1974/1974_73_938/</link>
   </item>
  
   <item>
    <title>Nixon v. Administrator Of General Services</title>
    <description>&lt;p&gt;No details yet.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1976/1976_75_1605/</link>
   </item>
  
   <item>
    <title>The Florida Star v. B. J. F.</title>
    <description>&lt;p&gt;No details yet.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_87_329/</link>
   </item>
  
   <item>
    <title>Time Inc. v. Hill</title>
    <description>&lt;p&gt;In 1952, three escaped convicts took James Hill, his wife, and their five children hostage in their Whitemarsh, Pennsylvania, home. After nineteen hours, the family was released unharmed. The convicts were later apprehended in a violent clash with police during which two of them were killed. In 1953, Joseph Hays' published a novel based on the Hill family's ordeal. When the novel was subsequently made into a play, Life Magazine ("Life") printed an article about the play that mirrored many of its inaccuracies concerning the Hill family's experience. Alleging that it deliberately misrepresented his story, Hill sought damages against Life. On appeal from an adverse ruling, the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court remanded for a new trial where a reduced adverse ruling was imposed on Life. Following an unsuccessful appeal in the New York Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court granted Life's owner, Time Inc. ("Time") certiorari.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1965/1965_22/</link>
   </item>
  
   <item>
    <title>Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co.</title>
    <description>&lt;p&gt;Hugo Zacchini performed a "human cannonball" act, in which he was shot from a cannon into a net 200 feet away. A free-lance reporter for Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. recorded the performance in its entirety without consent and it aired on the nightly news. Subsequently, Zacchini sued Scripps-Howard, alleging the unlawful appropriation of his professional property. Ultimately, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in favor of Scripps-Howard. While recognizing that Zacchini had a cause of action for the infringement of his state-law right to publicity, the court found that Scripps-Howard was 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.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <link>http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1976/1976_76_577/</link>
   </item>
  
 </channel>
</rss>
