Csuf Communications 407 Media Law Ch. 5, 6, 7, 8

Front 1

How is the tort of disclosure of private facts different from libel?

Back 1

Disclosure of private facts concerns the dissemination of accurate information.

Front 2

The false-light tort aims to

Back 2

compensate individuals for personal embarrassment and anguish.

Front 3

When false information is added to journalistic accounts, as in the Cantrell case, this falls into the kind of false-light situation called

Back 3

embellishment

Front 4

The case of Dietemann v. Time Inc. illustrates that

Back 4

there is no blanket newsworthiness privilege in intrusion cases; there is no First Amendment immunity in intrusion cases; a&b

Front 5

The concept of a right of privacy was first proposed in an 1890 Harvard Law Review article written by two men, one of whom would later become a U.S. Supreme Court justice. The future justice was:

Back 5

Louis Brandeis

Front 6

The right of privacy normally includes all of the following concepts except:

Back 6

the right not to be photographed at the scene of a news event

Front 7

In Time, Inc. v. Hill, the Supreme Court ruled that:

Back 7

a family that was held hostage by escaped convicts had to prove actual malice to win a false light privacy case against a magazine

Front 8

In the U.S., privacy against the mass media is enforced primarily through

Back 8

four separate privacy torts.

Front 9

What is the basic theory behind appropriation law?

Back 9

Individuals alone should have the right to control the marketing or exploitation of their own personages.

Front 10

The U.S. Supreme Court held that a newspaper committed an invasion of privacy by falsely implying that a reporter had interviewed someone who had not been interviewed and describing how that person felt after a tragedy. The case?

Back 10

Cantrell v. Forest City Publishing Co.

Front 11

Reversing an earlier decision, the Supreme Court declared in 2003 that there is a constitutional right of privacy that bars states from prosecuting consenting, adult homosexuals for private acts of sodomy. The case?

Back 11

Lawrence v. Texas

Front 12

In Florida Star v. B.J.F., the Supreme Court held that:

Back 12

the media may not be penalized for publishing information lawfully obtained from a court document that was made public

Front 13

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that it is usually a violation of the Fourth Amendment for law enforcement officers to allow the media to accompany them into a private home when the officers go in, even with a search or arrest warrant. The case:

Back 13

Wilson v. Layne

Front 14

In which of these cases did a celebrity win monetary damages even though there was no use whatever of his/her name or photograph?

Back 14

Midler v. Ford Motor Company

Front 15

Under current U.S. law, how long does a copyright remain in effect if a work has an individual author?

Back 15

the authors life plus 70 years

Front 16

Under current U.S. law, a person may copyright all of the following except:

Back 16

the factual information in a news story

Front 17

What happens if you dont bother to register a copyright and someone pirates your work five years after it is published?

Back 17

the copyright is still valid, but your remedies in an infringement lawsuit will be more limited

Front 18

The Supreme Court held that publishers may not place older freelance works in electronic data bases without getting permission from the author in the case of:

Back 18

New York Times Co. v. Tasini

Front 19

After a copyright eventually expires and the work falls into the public domain, anyone may reproduce or distribute the work under a long-established legal principle that the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed in the 2003 case of:

Back 19

Dastar v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.

Front 20

In Harper & Row Publishers v. The Nation Enterprises, the Supreme Court held that:

Back 20

it was not a fair use to publish a 300-word excerpt from a presidents memoirs before they were published in book form

Front 21

Under the Supreme Court ruling in Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, commissioned artistic works are:

Back 21

owned by the artist if he/she is an independent contractor

Front 22

The Supreme Courts Sony v. Universal City Studios decision held that home video taping is:

Back 22

a fair use if you engage in “time-shifting,” that is, you watch the taped programs later and make no commercial use of the tapes

Front 23

The Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that when a company seeks to encourage and facilitate the illegal sharing of copyrighted works, that company may be held liable for copyright infringements by users of its products or services. The case:

Back 23

MGM v. Grokster

Front 24

In Capitol Records v. Naxos, the New York Court of Appeals held that:

Back 24

recordings made in England as early as 1932 are protected by the states common law copyright until 2067

Front 25

Under the latest federal law, when may a copyrighted work be photocopied legally?

Back 25

whenever it is a fair use, including single-copy reproduction of some works by libraries;

Front 26

International copyrights have been protected at one time or another by:

Back 26

the Berne Convention; the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT); various treaties between the U.S. and individual countries; the Universal Copyright Convention; all of these.

Front 27

Whether a retail store or restaurant must pay royalties for the use of broadcast music is now governed by:

Back 27

the Fairness in Music Licensing Act.

Front 28

The primary federal trademark law is the:

Back 28

Lanham Act

Front 29

Copyright trolls are companies that

Back 29

buy rights from others and aggressively pursue infringements;

Front 30

In Golan v. Holder, the Supreme Court said that works in the public domain:

Back 30

can be removed from the public domain by new laws

Front 31

The free press-fair trial controversy stems from a conflict between the guarantee of a free press in the First Amendment and the right of the accused to a trial before impartial jurors, set forth in:

Back 31

the Sixth Amendment

Front 32

The Supreme Court once ordered a new trial for a man convicted of murder in a case where some of the jurors admitted they were prejudiced because of sensational pretrial publicity. The prosecutor, who was running for re-election, issued an inflammatory press release, aggravating the problem. The case?

Back 32

Sheppard v. Maxwell

Front 33

Prejudicial publicity problems sometimes result from the reporting of:

Back 33

involuntary confessions; a defendants prior criminal record; test results that may not be admitted into evidence at a trial; hearsay evidence; all of these.

Front 34

In Sheppard v. Maxwell, the Supreme Court urged judges to control prejudicial publicity by:

Back 34

sequestering juries; granting continuances; issuing protective orders; granting changes of venue; all of these.

Front 35

The Supreme Court has held that judges should not ordinarily issue “gag” orders that apply directly to the media, as opposed to orders that limit what trial participants may tell the media. The case:

Back 35

Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart

Front 36

The Supreme Court first ruled that criminal trials must usually be open to the press and public in what case?

Back 36

Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia

Front 37

The California Supreme Court ruled that civil trials must usually be open to the press and public in what case?

Back 37

NBC Subsidiary v. Superior Court

Front 38

The Supreme Court overturned a state law that required the courtroom to be closed whenever a minor victim of a sex crime was testifying. The case?

Back 38

Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court

Front 39

The jury selection process should normally be conducted in an open courtroom, according to the U.S. Supreme Courts ruling in:

Back 39

Press-Enterprise v. Superior Court (Press-Enterprise I)

Front 40

In the 1986 Riverside Press Enterprise v. Superior Court case (Press-Enterprise II), the Supreme Court held that

Back 40

preliminary hearings may be closed to the public only when there is a “substantial probability” that an open hearing would produce prejudicial publicity and closing the hearing would actually prevent the publicity

Front 41

The Supreme Court first ruled that the presence of cameras does not necessarily violate the defendants right to a fair trial in what case?

Back 41

Chandler v. Florida

Front 42

A citation for direct contempt of court is most likely to result from a situation in which

Back 42

someone violates the decorum of a courtroom (e.g., by taking unauthorized pictures)

Front 43

Indirect contempt of court is most likely to result from a situation in which

Back 43

someone tries to influence the outcome of a trial by actions away from the courtroom

Front 44

If the traditional common law did not recognize an evidentiary privilege for journalists, under what circumstances did the common law recognize such a privilege?

Back 44

the lawyer-client relationship; the doctor-patient relationship; the priest-penitent relationship; the husband-wife relationship; all of these.

Front 45

In 1991 the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment does not protect the news media from being sued for breaking a promise not to identify a news source. The case?

Back 45

Cohen v. Cowles Media

Front 46

In Branzburg v. Hayes, the Supreme Court held that:

Back 46

reporters must testify before federal grand juries, but there may be other times when reporters privilege exempts them from testifying

Front 47

The Supreme Court first held that judges may not use their contempt powers to silence journalistic criticism or other First Amendment activities unless there is a clear and present danger to the administration of justice in:

Back 47

Bridges v. California

Front 48

Vanessa Leggett was eventually released from jail without identifying her sources or revealing other confidential information because:

Back 48

the federal grand jury that had subpoenaed her adjourned without indicting anyone

Front 49

Judith Miller of the New York Times was jailed for declining to identify a source because:

Back 49

she was not protected by any shield law; a federal appeals court said she was not protected by any reporters privilege based on the First Amendment; the Supreme Court declined to hear her case after lower courts ruled against her; the prosecutor said her testimony was needed in a grand jury investigation; all of these

Front 50

Judith Miller was eventually released from jail because:

Back 50

she agreed to identify her source