1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    If you are not a 12ozProphet Member, please take a moment to register to gain full access to our website and all of its features. As a 12ozProphet Member you will be able to post comments, start discussions, communicate privately with other members and access members-only content. Registration is fast, simple and free, so join today and be a part of the largest and longest running Graffiti, Art, Style & Culture forum online.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please email us at info@12ozprophet.com and we'll help you recover your account. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum (and don't forget to follow @12ozprophet in Instagram)!

Attn: Poop Woman Kathy

Discussion in 'Channel Zero' started by Milton, Aug 21, 2004.

  1. Milton

    Milton 12oz Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,253

    Attn: Poop Woman Kathy

    Discussion started by Milton - Aug 21, 2004

    I briefed this case (Costanza v Seinfeld) did I do any good, what else do I need to do?

    Practice Brief:
    Title:
    Costanza v Seinfeld
    181 Misc. 2nd 562, 693 N.Y.S. 2d 897
    (Sup. Ct., N.Y. County 1999)

    Parties:
    P = Michael Costanza: A person that believes that his name and likeness are being used in a humiliating manner on a televison show (Seinfeld).
    Ds = Jerry Seinfeld (Comedian), Larry David (Cocreator of Seinfeld), The National Broadcasting Company, Production Companies: People and Companies accused of using Costanza’s name and likeness.

    Proc. History:
    P sued for invasion of his privacy. Ds made a preanswer motion to dismiss.

    Facts:
    P argues that under sections 50 and 51 of New York’s Civil Rights law he should be compensated for the humiliation caused by the use of his image. Also that Mr. Costanza never provided written consent for this use of his name and likeness.
    Ds argue under cases Howell v. New York Post. Co.; and Freihofer v. Hearst Corp., that the New York Court of Appeals has set precedent for not allowing common-law claims for invasion of privacy. Also that to impinge on a persons right to privacy their name and likeness must be used for advertising purposes without written consent. Also that the likeness of Mr. Costanza was never used for advertising purposes. And that in Hampton v. Guare, a similar case, the courts opinion was that “Works of fiction and satire do not fall within the narrow scope of the statutory phrases ‘advertising’ and ‘trade,’”

    Issue:
    Does New York provide a right to privacy with regards to the use of a name and likeness without written consent in the comedic presentation of a television show?

    Holding:
    No.

    Rule:
    New York Civil Rights Law does not provide for common-law claims for invasion of privacy against the use of a persons name and likeness in the development and production of a television show.

    Reasoning:
    The facts of the case show that Mr. Costanza’s written consent was not necessary to use his name and likeness. Although following the appeal of Roberson v Rochester Folding Box Co. sections 50 and 51 of New York Civil Rights Law were enacted to protect against the use of a persons name and likeness for advertising and trade purposes, the use of Mr. Costanza’s image in a work of both fiction and satire (The Seinfeld Show) does not fall within the scope of these laws.

    Judgement: The claim must be dismissed.

    Comments:
    This case shows to a certain degree the limits imposed on Sections 50 and 51 of the New York Civil Rights Law, which apply specifically to trade and advertising.
     
    Milton - Rank: 12oz Senior Member - Messages:
    2,253
    - Joined:
    May 21, 2003
  2. Poop Man Bob

    Poop Man Bob Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2000
    Messages:
    10,259

    Poop Man Bob - Replied Aug 21, 2004

    Your Issue and Rule are a little off - adjust the Rule so that it answers the question posed in the Issue. Other than that, great job. How long did it take you?

    Remember that this will get easier with time. Eventually you'll be able to write only what's needed to jog your memory of a particular case. While you may write down the rule and issue, the facts and parties sections will become smaller and (may) eventually disappear. But this is all up to you - whatever you need to do to make yourself comfortable in class and not freak out when called on.

    Plus - you know that the majority of law school classes will not test you on the particular facts of individual cases. Keep this in mind when deciding how to spend your time and effort. It's usually the rule of law that professors are concerned with - that and your ability to apply that rule to a new set of facts.

    Good work, eh.
     
    Poop Man Bob - Rank: Dirty Dozen Crew - Messages:
    10,259
    - Joined:
    Nov 16, 2000
  3. Milton

    Milton 12oz Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,253

    Milton - Replied Aug 21, 2004

    Thanks buddy.

    Remember if they're in better shape you have to lead them a little in case they try to run...
     
    Milton - Rank: 12oz Senior Member - Messages:
    2,253
    - Joined:
    May 21, 2003
  4. Kr430n5_666

    Kr430n5_666 Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    19,229

    Kr430n5_666 - Replied Aug 21, 2004

    D: ROOTS
    D: HOW ARE YOU
    M: super fantastic greatnessness
    D: PERFECT
    M: shang tsungs ass
    D: HAHAHAHA
     
    Kr430n5_666 - Rank: Banned - Messages:
    19,229
    - Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004