Posted by Neil at 209.245.186.89 on August 02, 2001 at 14:34:17:
In response to my little blackmail metaphor, there's a point that's been gnawing at me that. Isis said, "The proper thing to do in that situation would be to say fuck you, I'll sue you out the ass for image use rights if you publish those photographs."
I actually did set up the situation in order to take away her image rights. Public figures do have (and deserve) a broad range of abilities to defend the use of their image by others for profit. They are (rightly) limited, however. If the person is in public and doing something newsworthy, then their rights are definitively ended.
This is why every publication in the world was able to use pictures of O.J. Simpson in all sorts of situations, in his SUV, being taken into custody, in court, whatever… It's also the excuse they have for those awful "Hard Copy" videos where some asshole with a camera pisses somebody famous off enough that they (justifiably) take a swing at them.
Two public figures having sex in public is newsworthy. Whereas she might attempt to make a case regarding her privacy or image rights, she would be highly unlikely to succeed at all with them and would likely be aware of that. Certainly I made the assumption that she was a reasonably savvy star.
Here, for the now confused, is the metaphorical blackmail scenario that I wrote:
Ok, let's say I'm a photographer. I have a contract with Undu-sleeze magazine, and they really want to publish these naked pictures I took of Lucy Moviestar making love to Jeremy Televisionactor on a public beach. Her husband would not be happy to see those, and her studio would not like this to get out – at least while she's under contract to them – as it could spoil her generally wholesome image.
First, though, I go to Ms. Moviestar and tell her that I took these pictures and that I'm planning to publish them.
She says, "What can I do about this?"
I say, "Well, I'm planning to ask your studio for $200,000." In fact, I suggest that donating it to a fine charity is good. It seems my mother has Alzheimer's, and I would feel very positive if they would do this…
At this point, I haven't made any direct promises, nor did I make a direct threat. I never said there was anything she could do to stop me, and in fact her statement never directly addresses the possibility, it's simply implied.
She, then, offers that she could personally make a donation. She's not a horribly wealthy woman, as she's still a rising star, but she's sure she could make a $10,000 donation, as it's clearly a good cause anyway.
The charity gets the $10,000. I give the pictures to Undu-sleeze and they publish them.
Did I blackmail Ms. Moviestar?
How about her studio? Assuming I did directly go to them and said, "Y'know, I have these pictures of Lucy Moviestar and Jeremy Televisionactor and I really think it would be a big help to me if you gave this Alzheimer's charity $200,000."
In that case, I have directly asked for the money with the blatant implication that they would be able to alter my behavior by donating the money.
What other possible reason would Miramax possibly have for - when directly asked for a specific amount under these circumstances – donating that specific number to that specific threat, except as bending to an implied threat?
Even assuming that you couldn't make the case with Kevin, which is probably true, because of the argument that their understandings were different. I don't think it changes the fact of it, though.
And I don't think you can begin to argue that if they really did or do directly ask Miramax for money, that they it's directly walking over whatever thin line of argument can be held up in the case of Kevin as an individual.